Concrete mix composition, mortar mix composition and method of making and curing concrete or mortar and concrete or mortar objects and structures

ABSTRACT

The invention comprises a method of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressive strength greater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing a cement-based material in an insulated concrete form, wherein the insulated concrete form has an R-value of at least 1.5, wherein the cement-based material comprises approximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight portland cement, and at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. The invention also comprises a method of making a cement-based object or structure. The invention further comprises objects or structures made by the foregoing methods.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application claims the benefit of the filing date of U.S.provisional patent application Ser. No. 61/558,467 filed Nov. 11, 2011.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention generally relates to cement-based materials. Thepresent invention also relates to curing concrete to acceleratedconcrete maturity or equivalent age of concrete to achieve improvedphysical properties. More particularly, this invention relates to amethod of casting and curing a concrete or mortar composition thatincludes a relatively low percentage of portland cement by mass, byaccelerating maturity or equivalent age of concrete, which produces aconcrete of similar or greater strength than conventional concrete. Thepresent invention also relates to a method of casting and curing aconcrete or mortar composition that includes a relatively highpercentage of recycled material by mass, by accelerating maturity orequivalent age of concrete, which produces a concrete of similar orgreater strength than conventional concrete. The present invention alsorelates to a method of casting and curing a concrete composition thatincludes a relatively low percentage of portland cement and a relativelyhigh percentage of recycled supplementary cementitious material, byaccelerating maturity or equivalent age of concrete, yet has similar orgreater strength than conventional concrete. The present invention alsorelates to concrete mixes in accordance with the present invention andto concrete objects or structures made by the present invention.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Concrete is a composite material consisting of a mineral-based hydraulicbinder which acts to adhere mineral particulates together in a solidmass; those particulates may consist of coarse aggregate (rock orgravel), fine aggregate (natural sand or crushed fines), and/orunhydrated or unreacted cement. Concrete dates back at least to Romantimes. The invention of concrete allowed the Romans to constructbuilding designs, such as arches, vaults and domes, which would not havebeen possible without the use of concrete. Roman concrete, or opuscaementicium, was made from a hydraulic mortar and aggregate or pumice.The hydraulic mortar was made from quicklime, gypsum or pozzolana andcombinations thereof. Quicklime, also known as burnt lime, is calciumoxide; gypsum is calcium sulfate dihydrate and pozzolana is a fine,sandy volcanic ash (with properties that were first discovered inPozzuoli, Italy). By using concrete, the Romans were able to buildarches, vaults and other structures that were not possible to buildbefore. However the concrete made with volcanic ash as the pozzolanicagent was slow to set and gain strength. Most likely the concrete wasbuild up in multiple layers on forms that had to stay in place for avery long time. Although the concrete was slow to set and gain strength,over along periods of time it achieved great strength and was extremelydurable. There are still Roman concrete structures standing today as atestimony to the quality of the concrete produced over 2000 years ago.

Due to the slow setting and great length of time that it took for theearly concrete to gain strength and forms to be removed, it never gainedbroad acceptance. In fact, it appears that it ceased to be used afterthe fall of the Roman Empire. Stone and clay brick masonry became thepreferred method of construction for most of human history.

In the late 1700's different types of Roman Cements were patented and in1824 Joseph Aspin filed a patent for the method of making what is knownas portland cement. The new manufactured cement resulted in fasterhardening cement with a higher compressive strength. During the 19thcentury there were many improvements made to the process of manufactureof portland cement. The concrete made with the portland cement allowedthe concrete to set fast and to gain strength sufficient to supportitself in a short amount of time. Therefore, the concrete forms could beremoved quickly and construction schedules could be shortened.

Modern concrete is composed of one or more: hydraulic cements, coarseaggregates, fine aggregates and of course water. Optionally, modernconcrete can include other supplementary cementitious materials, inertfillers, property modifying chemical admixtures and coloring agents. Thehydraulic cement is typically portland cement. Other cementitiousmaterials include fly ash, slag cement and other natural pozzolanicmaterials. Mortars are also made from cementitious material, aggregate,water and optionally lime.

Portland cement is the most commonly used hydraulic cement in use aroundthe world today. Portland cement is typically made from limestone, aswell as clay, sand, or shale, among other raw materials. The rawmaterials for portland cement production are proportioned to obtain adesired mixture of minerals containing calcium oxide, silicon oxide,aluminum oxide, ferric oxide, and magnesium oxide. The raw materials arefirst crushed and ground to form a fine powder. The powder is thenheated in a kiln to a peak temperature of 1,400-1,500° C., which resultsin sintering the powder which produces lumps or nodules referred to asclinkers. The heating process, among other things, drives off relativelylarge amounts of carbon dioxide. The production of one ton of portlandcement releases one ton of carbon dioxide (CO₂) into the atmosphere,accounting for 5 to 7 percent or more of the world's annual carbondioxide emissions. The portland cement clinker is then ground to a finepowder with the addition of a small amount of calcium sulfate, usuallyderived from gypsum or anhydrite, as well as limestone powder in somecases. The finished powder is referred to as portland cement. Concreteor mortar made with portland cement sets relatively quickly and gainshigh compressive strength in a relatively short amount of time. Althoughgreat improvements have been made to the processes and efficiencies ofportland cement manufacture, it is still a very expensive and highlypolluting industrial process.

Fly ash is a by-product of the combustion of pulverized coal in electricpower generation plants. When the pulverized coal is ignited in thecombustion chamber, much of the carbon and volatile materials are burnedoff. However, some of the mineral impurities of clay, shale, feldspars,etc., are fused in suspension and carried out of the combustion chamberin the exhaust gases. As the exhaust gases cool, the fused materialssolidify into spherical glassy particles called fly ash. When mixed withlime and water fly ash may form compounds similar to those formed fromhydration of portland cement. Two classifications of fly ash aredescribed in ASTM C 618, based upon composition, with their compositionknown to be related to the type of coal burned. Class F fly ash isnormally produced from burning anthracite or bituminous coal that meetsthe applicable requirements. This Class of fly ash has pozzolanicproperties and will have a minimum silicon dioxide plus aluminum oxideplus iron oxide of 70%. Class C fly ash is normally produced fromsubbituminous coal that meets the applicable requirements. This Class offly ash, in addition to having pozzolanic properties, also has somecementitious properties and will have a minimum silicon dioxide plusaluminum oxide plus iron oxide content of 50%. Class C fly ash is usedat dosages of 15% to 40% by mass of the cementitious materials inconcrete, with the balance being portland cement. Class F fly ash isgenerally used at dosages of 15% to 40%, with the balance being portlandcement. Use of fly ash in concrete in the U.S. is governed largely byASTM Standard C 618. This standard prohibits the use of fly ash with toomuch residual carbon, which indicates that the coal was not burnedthoroughly enough. Residual carbon impedes air entrainment and reducesthe concrete's freeze-thaw resistance and may affect other properties aswell. It is generally accepted that fly ash creates concrete with ahigher compressive strength, but that this happens slowly over a longerperiod of time than concrete without fly ash. Fly ash-containingconcretes also have to be managed differently as they cure, because theytend to cure and gain strength more slowly than mixes with more or agreater fraction of portland cement. Due to the slow compressivestrength gain, concrete forms have to stay in place for many more daysand perhaps weeks compared to concrete made with portland cement.Depending on the weather and ambient temperature, fly ash may not gainmuch strength at all in cold climates or in winter.

In the past, fly ash produced from coal combustion was simply entrainedin flue gases and dispersed into the atmosphere. This createdenvironmental and health concerns that prompted laws which have reducedfly ash emissions to less than 1 percent of ash production. Worldwide,more than 65% of fly ash produced from coal power stations is disposedof in landfills and ash ponds.

The recycling of fly ash has become an increasing concern in recentyears due to increasing landfill costs and current interest insustainable development. As of 2005, U.S. coal-fired power plantsreported producing 71.1 million tons of fly ash, of which 29.1 milliontons were reused in various applications. If the nearly 42 million tonsof unused fly ash had been recycled, it would have reduced the need forapproximately 27,500 acre·ft (33,900,000 m³) of landfill space. Otherenvironmental benefits to recycling fly ash include reducing the demandfor virgin materials that would need quarrying and substituting formaterials that may be energy-intensive to create, such as portlandcement.

As of 2006, about 125 million tons of coal-combustion byproducts,including fly ash, were produced in the U.S. each year, with about 43percent of that amount used in commercial applications, according to theAmerican Coal Ash Association. As of early 2008, the United StatesEnvironmental Protection Agency hoped that figure would increase to 50percent as of 2011. More recently, there has been reduced interest inreusing fly ash. Of course, it is obvious that the more fly ash can berecycled, the better for the environment. Incorporation into concrete isone of the best way to utilize fly ash since once the concrete hardensthe fly ash is encapsulated in the concrete and cannot leach out orescape into the environment. Furthermore, since there is such a largeoversupply of fly ash, generally the cost is relatively low.

Fly ash can be used in concrete in two different ways: as a partialreplacement for hydraulic cement or as filler. The first use takesadvantage of the pozzolanic properties of fly ash, which, when it reactswith lime or calcium hydroxide, can enhance the strength of cementitiouscomposites. However, fly ash is relatively inert and the increase incompressive strength can take up to 60 to 90 days or longer tomaterialize. Also, since fly ash is just a by-product from the powerindustry, the variable properties of fly ash have always been a majorconcern to the end users in the concrete industry, as variations inconcrete properties at early and late ages may result.

The incorporation of fly ash in concrete improves workability andthereby reduces the water requirement with respect to conventionalconcrete. This is most beneficial where concrete is pumped into place.Among numerous other effects are reduced bleeding, reduced segregation,reduced permeability, increased plasticity, lowered heat of hydration,and increased setting times (ACI Committee 226, 1987, supra). Also, theslump is higher when fly ash is used (Ukita et al., 1989, SP-114,American Concrete Institute, Detroit, pp. 219-240). Comprehensiveresearch demonstrated that high volume fly ash concretes showed higherlong-term strength development, lower water and gas permeability, andhigher chloride ion resistance in comparison with portland cementconcretes without fly ash. See U.S. Pat. No. 6,818,058.

However, the prior art recognizes that the use of fly ash in concretehas many drawbacks. For example, the addition of fly ash to concreteresults in a product with low air entrainment and low early strengthdevelopment. As noted above, a critical drawback of the use of fly ashin concrete is that initially the fly ash significantly reduces thecompressive strength of the concrete. Tests conducted by Ravindrarajahand Tam (1989, Fly Ash, Silica Fume, Slag, and Natural Pozzolans inConcrete, SP-114, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, pp. 139-155)showed that the compressive strength of fly ash concrete at early agesare lower than those for the control concrete. Most of the reportedstudies tend to show a lower concrete strength due to the presence offly ash when used as a partial replacement for portland cement; none hasyet suggested a solution to actually enhance the property of concreteeconomically when using fly ash. Yet, for fly ash to be used as apartial replacement for cement, it must be comparable to cement in termsof strength contribution at a point useful in construction. As apractical matter, this means that the fly ash concrete must reach anacceptable compressive strength within days to be comparable toconventional or ordinary portland cement mixes.

Other widely used pozzolans are slag cement (also known as groundgranulated blast furnace slag or GGBFS) and silica fume. Blast furnaceslag is the non-metallic by-product of iron or steel production,generally consisting of silicon, calcium, aluminum, magnesium andoxygen. When iron is manufactured using a blast furnace, two productscollect in the hearth—molten iron and slag. The slag floats to the topof the iron. The slag is skimmed off and fed to a granulator. In thegranulator the molten slag is rapidly quenched with water. The resultinggranules are essentially glassy, non-metallic silicates andaluminosilicates of calcium. The glass content of the slag generallydetermines its cementitious character or suitability for use inhydraulic cement. Generally, the higher the glass content the greaterthe cementitious properties of the slag. See U.S. Pat. No. 7,491,268.Ground slag suitable for use as hydraulic cement is described in ASTM C989. For each metric ton of pig iron produced, there is approximately ⅓of a metric ton of slag produced. In 2009 worldwide pig iron productionwas 1.211 billion tons. There was an estimated 400 million tons of slagproduced. If slag is not granulated by quenching with water or steam andallowed to cool naturally, then it becomes an amorphous type aggregate.Aggregate made from slag is used for roadbeds and other fillerapplication, but relatively little is used for the manufacture of slagcement due to relatively low demand for this waste material. In thepast, amorphous slag was piled up close to steel plants creating a socalled “brown fields.” Unfortunately, around the Great Lakes slag waseven disposed of by dumping in the bottom of lakes. More recently, theU.S. has spent large sums of money to clean up these brown fields.Unfortunately, around the world relatively large amounts of amorphousslag sit in landfills close to iron furnace plants.

Concrete made with slag cement will have higher compressive and flexuralstrength growth over the lifetime of the concrete compared withconventional or ordinary portland cement concrete mixes. Slag cementimproves the tensile strength capacity of concrete. Although whencombined with relatively large amounts of portland cement slag cementsets faster than the fly ash, it is still slow to set and to gainstrength when compared to conventional portland cement concrete. Hence,there is relatively low demand for the use of slag cement in concrete ormortar mixes. Therefore depending on the application, only a relativelysmall percentage of the portland cement is replaced with slag cement inconcrete or mortar.

When water is added to hydraulic cement, a sequence of chemicalreactions known collectively as “hydration” takes place. Hydration is anexothermic reaction, which means that the reaction produces heat. Thus,when concrete is initially mixed, it heats up due to a sequence ofchemical reactions. But, in a relatively short amount of time, the heatproduced decreases rapidly. The hydration reaction is temperaturedependent. Therefore, the more heat, (i.e., higher ambient and/orconcrete temperature), the faster the reaction; the less heat (i.e.,colder), the slower the reaction. Thus, to cure concrete properly, twoelements are necessary, appropriate temperature and availability ofmoisture. There is a direct relationship between the concretetemperature and the strength of the concrete in a given amount of time.

Maturity of concrete is measured as “equivalent age” and is given intemperature degrees×hours (either ° C.-Hrs or ° F.-Hrs). Maturity ofconcrete has became a useful tool in predicting the strength ofconcrete, particularly at ages earlier than 28 days and is related tothe time and curing conditions, especially temperature. In this way, thematurity concept is also related to the rate of hydration and the rateof strength gain for a particular mix design.

Concrete slabs, walls, columns, various types of precast panels, precaststructures, concrete pavers, artificial stone and other concretestructures, traditionally have been made by building a form. The formsare usually made from plywood, wood, metal and other structural members.Unhardened (i.e., plastic) concrete is poured into the space defined byopposed spaced form members or laying flat supported on the ground. Oncethe concrete develops sufficiently strength, the forms are removedleaving a concrete slab, walls, columns, precast panels and structures,pavers, artificial stone or other concrete structure or structuralmember; however, the concrete at this point is usually not completelycured. The unprotected concrete wall is then exposed to the elementsduring the remainder of the curing process. Since concrete is exposed toambient temperatures, the initial heat of hydration is lost ratherquickly to the surroundings, generally overnight. From that point on theconcrete internal temperature follows very closely the ambienttemperature. The exposure of the concrete to the elements, especiallytemperature variations, makes the curing of concrete, and the ultimatestrength it can achieve, as unpredictable as the weather.

There is a disconnect between the type of forms in which concrete iscast and the curing to which it is subjected and the desired rate ofrapid strength gain. Conventional concrete forms are designed towithstand a certain amount of pressure with the proper safety factor andbe economical and easy to use. They seem to only serve the purpose ofholding the plastic concrete mix in the desired form until it hasgenerally hardened to around 2000 psi so that the forms can be strippedand reused. Since concrete forms are relatively expensive, concretemixes are designed to set fast and achieve the necessary compressivestrength to allow the forms to be stripped in approximately 1 to 3 days.Concrete curing, strength gain and internal concrete temperature havenever been a concern for the concrete form manufacturers. Due to theseconstraints, and particularly the slow rate of strength gain of concreteor mortar made with fly ash or slag cement, the use of fly ash or slagcement in concrete has generally been limited to 20-30% of thecementitious material, with the balance being portland cement.

Concrete cures over a relatively long period of time. If it is desiredfor the concrete to cure more quickly or to have higher earlierstrength, additives such as chemical accelerating admixtures can beadded to the concrete mix. However, such additives are relativelyexpensive which significantly increases the cost of the concrete. Ifstronger concrete is required, the fraction of portland cement in theconcrete is typically increased. However, portland cement is a majorcontributor to greenhouse gasses and is highly energy intensive toproduce. Thus, portland cement and traditional concrete mixes are notvery environmentally friendly.

Insulated concrete form systems are known in the prior art and typicallyare made from a plurality of modular form members. U.S. Pat. Nos.5,497,592; 5,809,725; 6,668,503; 6,898,912 and 7,124,547 (thedisclosures of which are all incorporated herein by reference) areexemplary of prior art modular insulated concrete form systems.Applicant's co-pending applications disclose insulated concrete formsystems. See U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 12/753,220 filed Apr. 2,2010; 13/247,133 filed Sep. 28, 2011 and 13/247,256 filed Sep. 28, 2011(the disclosures of which are both incorporated herein by reference intheir entirety).

It is critically important in construction to have concrete or mortarthat predictably achieves required performance characteristics; e.g., aminimum compressive strength within 1 to 3 days, to permit the forms tobe stripped, and 7 to 14 days to place loads on the structure. Portlandcement concrete achieves approximately 90%-95% of the ultimatecompressive strength in the first 28 days. Therefore most concretespecifications are based on a 28-day strength. A corollary is that aconstruction or civil engineer must be able to predict the compressivestrength of a concrete or mortar mixture after a given period of time.However, the prior art concrete or mortar mixtures that contain fly ashor slag cement lack predictability with respect to rate of compressivestrength development and ultimate compressive strength, and generallyhave much lower early compressive strength than concrete or mortarmixtures that lack fly ash or slag cement. Therefore, there has been adisincentive to use fly ash or slag cement in such hardenable mixtures.

As previously noted, concrete quality is most commonly assessed basedupon its 28-day strength, as measured through standard compressiontesting of concrete. Compression tests may be performed on concrete castin the field, commonly tested as cylinders in North America, Australia,New Zealand, and France but as cubes elsewhere, including Great Britainand Germany. When cast in the field as cylinders, the concrete is placedin several lifts into a cylindrical mold with length-to-diameter ratioof 2.0, where the minimum cylinder diameter is at least three times themaximum aggregate size. The concrete is well-compacted typically throughtamping, rodding, and/or use of vibration. After finishing, thecylinders are cured in a specified manner, often moist cured at73.5±3.5° F. (23.0±2.0° C.) such as described by ASTM C192. Both ofthese common practices—the consolidation and curing processes—minimizevariability and maximize strength development in concrete cylinders.Testing is also performed according to standard procedures, such as byASTM C39, most commonly at 28 days but also at earlier and later ageswhen specified. Compressive strength measured on field-cast cylindersshould be viewed as an assessment of the potential quality of theconcrete and is not necessarily representative of the strength achievedin the same concrete cast as a structural element in the field. In thefield, the compaction and curing conditions can be substantiallydifferent from those specified in ASTM C192, resulting in concrete withsubstantially lower strength than indicated from testing of castcylinders.

When assessments of the strength or quality of concrete as-cast are ofinterest, compression testing can be performed on cylindrical concretesamples obtained from field structures. These concrete cores can beobtained by drilling into the hardened concrete with a diamond bit, asdescribed in ASTM C42. Cores may be obtained in varying diameters andlengths, with an objective to obtain a length-to-diameter ratio of 2.0and to achieve a diameter, which is at least three times the maximumaggregate size. However, it may not always be possible—due toreinforcement congestion, for example—to obtain cores meeting thesespecifications. As a result, the strength measured on these cores, then,may not reflect the actual strength of the as-cast concrete in thefield. Other factors may also influence the strength measured in cores,generally resulting in a decrease in measured strength compared toactual strength. Such factors include the moisture content in the coreand the uniformity or lack thereof in the moisture state, the state ofstress in the structural element (i.e., in regions of tension,microcracking will decrease measured core strength) from where the corewas obtained, the orientation of the core relative to the horizontalplane of placement (i.e., strengths may be lower near the top of astructure, due to bleeding or segregation), and damage induced in thecore during cutting, extraction, and preparation (i.e., sawing tolength, end grinding) for testing, among other factors. Thus, while corestrengths are generally presumed to more accurately reflect the in-placeconcrete strength than standard-cured cast cylinders, the strength ofthe cores should not necessarily be presumed to be equivalent to thein-place concrete strength.

Predictions of concrete strength may also be made by applying thematurity concept, previously discussed. ASTM C918 describes how amaturity relationship can be developed for a particular mix design suchthat the strength can be anticipated based upon curing history,including temperature and age, and early measures of strength. However,it is important to recognize that accurate predictions can only be madeif the concrete mix proportions and constituent materials, includingtype and composition of cementitious materials, aggregates, and anychemical admixtures, are exactly the same as those used to develop thematurity relationship. ASTM C192-07 provides some caution againstpredictions of strength based upon early age test results and maturityrelationships: “Use of the results from this test method to predictspecification compliance of strengths at later ages must be applied withcaution because strength requirements in existing specifications andcodes are not based upon early-age testing.” It is clear that thematurity relationship is complex and that predicted strengths should beviewed as only an indicator of in situ concrete strength.

Since both fly ash and slag cement are recycled materials, it would bedesirable to produce a concrete composition that could employ relativelyhigh amounts of these recycled materials. It would also be desirable touse reduced amounts of portland cement in concrete mixtures so as toreduce the amount of greenhouse gases that result from its manufacture.The challenge to the concrete industry has been to achieve these desiredresults without adversely affecting the compressive strength or otherdesirable properties of the finished concrete. It is believed that priorto the present invention, no one has been able to achieve these results.It would also be desirable to provide a concrete mix and a system forcuring concrete that accelerates the maturity or equivalent age ofconcrete.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention satisfies the foregoing needs by providing animproved cement-based materials, such as concrete or mortar mixcompositions, and an improved method for curing cement-based materials.

In a disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises a method ofmaking a cement-based object or structure having a compressive strengthgreater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The cement-based material comprises cementitious materialand aggregate; wherein the cementitious material comprises approximately10% to approximately 80% by weight portland cement, approximately 20% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 80% byweight fly ash; and water sufficient to hydrate the cementitiousmaterial. In a further disclosed embodiment, the method also comprisesallowing the cement-based material to at least partially cure in theinsulated concrete form.

In a disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises a method ofmaking a cement-based object or structure having a compressive strengthgreater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The cement-based material comprises cementitious materialand aggregate; wherein the cementitious material comprises 10% toapproximately 70% by weight portland cement, 10% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; andwater sufficient to hydrate the cementitious material. In a furtherdisclosed embodiment, the method also comprises allowing thecement-based material to at least partially cure in the insulatedconcrete form.

In a disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises a method ofmaking a cement-based object or structure having a compressive strengthgreater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The cement-based material comprises cementitious materialand aggregate; wherein the cementitious material comprises approximately10% to approximately 60% by weight portland cement, approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 80% byweight fly ash; and water sufficient to hydrate the hydraulic cement. Ina further disclosed embodiment, the method also comprises allowing thecement-based material to at least partially cure in the insulatedconcrete form.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises amethod of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressivestrength greater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The cement-based material comprises cementitious materialand aggregate; wherein the cementitious material comprises approximately10% to approximately 50% by weight portland cement, approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 80% byweight fly ash; and water sufficient to hydrate the cementitiousmaterial. In a further disclosed embodiment, the method also comprisesallowing the cement-based material to at least partially cure in theinsulated concrete form.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises amethod of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressivestrength greater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The concrete mix comprises cementitious material andaggregate; wherein the cementitious material comprises approximately 10%to approximately 40% by weight portland cement, approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 80% byweight fly ash; and water sufficient to hydrate the cementitiousmaterial. In a further disclosed embodiment, the method also comprisesallowing the cement-based material to at least partially cure in theinsulated concrete form.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises amethod of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressivestrength greater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The concrete mix comprises cementitious material andaggregate; wherein the cementitious material comprises approximately 10%to less than approximately 50% by weight portland cement, approximately20% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately80% by weight fly ash; and water sufficient to hydrate the cementitiousmaterial. In a further disclosed embodiment, the method also comprisesallowing the cement-based material to at least partially cure in theinsulated concrete form.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises amethod of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressivestrength greater than about 1,000 psi. The cement-based structure orobject comprises an insulated concrete form or mold, wherein theinsulated concrete form or mold has insulating properties equivalent toat least approximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulatingvalue of at least R 1.5; and a cement-based material within theinsulated concrete form. The cement-based material within the insulatedconcrete form or mold comprises cementitious material and aggregate;wherein the cementitious material comprises less than 50% by weightportland cement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slagcement, and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises acement-based object or structure having a compressive strength greaterthan about 1,000 psi. The cement-based material object or structurecomprises an insulated concrete form, wherein the insulated concreteform has insulating properties equivalent to at least approximately 0.5inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of at least R 1.5; and acement-based material within the insulated concrete form. Thecement-based material within the insulated concrete form comprisescementitious material and aggregate; wherein the cementitious materialcomprises less than 50% by weight portland cement, approximately 20% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement, and approximately 10% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises amethod of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressivestrength greater than about 1,000 psi, the method comprising placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form, wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inches of polystyrene foam or an insulating value ofat least R 1.5, wherein the cement-based material comprises portlandcement, slag cement and fly ash and wherein the weight ratio of portlandcement to slag cement to fly ash is approximately 1 to 1 to 1.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises amethod of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressivestrength greater than about 1,000 psi, the method comprising placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form, wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inches of polystyrene foam or an insulating value ofat least R 1.5, wherein the cement-based material comprises portlandcement, slag cement and fly ash and wherein at three to seven days thecement-based material in the insulated concrete form has a compressivestrength at least 25% greater than the same cement-based material wouldhave after the same amount of time in a non-insulated concrete formunder the same conditions.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises amethod of making a cement-based object or structure having a compressivestrength greater than about 1,000 psi, the method comprising placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form, wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inches of polystyrene foam or an insulating value ofat least R 1.5, wherein the cement-based material comprises portlandcement, slag cement and fly ash and wherein at three to seven days themortar mix in the insulated concrete form has a compressive strength atleast 25% greater than the same mortar mix would have after the sameamount of time in a non-insulated concrete form under the sameconditions.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises acement-based object or structure having a compressive strength greaterthan about 1,000 psi. The cement-based object or structure comprises aninsulated concrete form, wherein the insulated concrete form hasinsulating properties equivalent to at least approximately 0.5 inches ofpolystyrene foam or an insulating value of at least R 1.5; and acement-based material within the insulated concrete form. Thecement-based material within the insulated concrete form comprisescementitious material and aggregate; wherein the cementitious materialcomprises approximately 10% to approximately 50% by weight portlandcement, approximately 20% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement,and 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash.

In another disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises acement-based object or structure having a compressive strength greaterthan about 1,000 psi. The concrete-based object or structure comprisesan insulated concrete form, wherein the insulated concrete form hasinsulating properties equivalent to at least approximately 0.5 inch ofpolystyrene foam or an insulating value of at least R 1.5; and acement-based material within the insulated concrete form. Thecement-based material within the insulated concrete form comprisescementitious material and aggregate; wherein the cementitious materialcomprises approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight portlandcement; at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement or approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;and water sufficient to hydrate the cementitious material.

In a disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises a method ofmaking a cement-based object or structure having a compressive strengthgreater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The cement-based material comprises cementitious materialand aggregate; wherein the cementitious material comprises approximately10% to approximately 90% by weight portland cement; at least one ofapproximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; and watersufficient to hydrate the cementitious material.

In a disclosed embodiment, the present invention comprises a method ofmaking a cement-based object or structure having a compressive strengthgreater than about 1,000 psi. The method comprises placing acement-based material in an insulated concrete form wherein theinsulated concrete form has insulating properties equivalent to at leastapproximately 0.5 inch of polystyrene foam or an insulating value of atleast R 1.5. The cement-based material comprises aggregate andcementitious material; wherein the cementitious material comprisesapproximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight portland cement and theremaining cementitious material comprising one or more supplementarycementitious materials; and water sufficient to hydrate the cementitiousmaterial.

Accordingly, it is an object of the present invention to provide animproved concrete mix.

Another object of the present invention is to provide an improved mortarmix.

Another object of the present invention is to provide an improvedconcrete object or structure.

A further object of the present invention is to provide an improvedsystem for curing concrete.

Another object of the present invention is to provide an improved systemfor curing mortar.

Another object of the present invention is to produce concrete mixes ormortar mixes by substituting for at least a portion of the portlandcement with relatively large amounts of supplementary cementitiousmaterials, such as fly ash, slag cement, rice husk ash, and silica fume,while having strength properties equal to or better than conventionalportland cement mixes thereby effectively reducing CO₂ emissions.

A further object of the present invention is to provide an acceleratedconcrete curing system to improve the maturity and equivalent age ofconcrete, especially concrete formulations that use relatively largeamounts of supplementary cementitious materials, such as slag cement,fly ash, silica fume and the like.

Yet another object of the present invention is to provide an acceleratedconcrete curing system to improve the maturity and equivalent age ofconcrete, especially concrete formulations that use relatively largeamounts of inert or filler materials, such as limestone powder, calciumcarbonate, titanium dioxide, quartz or other finely divided mineralsthat densify the hydrated cement paste.

A further object of the present invention is to provide an acceleratedconcrete curing system to improve the maturity and equivalent age forconcrete formulations that use relatively large amounts of recycledindustrial waste material, such as slag cement, fly ash, silica fume,pulverized glass, ground or shredded rubber, synthetic fibers, glass,cellulose, carbon or steel fibers, and/or rice husk ash, in combinationwith inert or filler material, such as ground limestone, calciumcarbonate, titanium dioxide, or quartz, while producing concrete havingan ultimate strength equivalent to, or better than, concrete made withconventional amounts of portland cement.

Yet another object of the present invention is to reduce the amount ofslag and fly ash in ponds or landfills.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a moreenvironmentally friendly concrete.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a concrete ormortar curing system that requires less portland cement.

Still another object of the present invention is to provide a concreteor mortar curing system that is more environmentally friendly.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a concrete ormortar curing system that reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a concrete ormortar curing system that using increased amount of recycled materials.

A further object of the present invention is to provide a concrete ormortar curing system that produces a concrete or mortar with a morerefined structure or microstructure.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a concrete ormortar curing system that produces concrete or mortar that is less waterpermeable.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a concrete curingsystem that produces concrete that has a longer service life.

A further object of the present invention is to provide a concretecuring system that is more blast resistant.

Another object of the present invention is to provide a concrete curingsystem that produces concrete with less concrete shrinkage, curlingand/or cracking.

Still another object of the present invention is to concrete mixes ormortar mixes that can be used to create improved precast concreteobjects or structures, such as panels, decks, beams, parking decks,bridge decks, wall cladding, pipe, vaults, pavers, brick, artificialstone and architectural concrete objects.

These and other objects, features and advantages of the presentinvention will become apparent after a review of the following detaileddescription of the disclosed embodiments and the appended drawing andclaims.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 lbs of fly ash (approximately 20%by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form(i.e., a Greencraft form) and a vertical conventional form over a 14-dayperiod. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 2 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) and avertical conventional form over a 14-day period.

FIG. 3 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraftform) and a vertical conventional form over a 14-day period. The ambienttemperature is also shown.

FIG. 4 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 lbs of fly ash (approximately 20%by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form(i.e., a Greencraft form) and a vertical conventional form over a 28-dayperiod. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 5 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) and avertical conventional form over a 28-day period.

FIG. 6 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraftform) and a vertical conventional form over a 28-day period. The ambienttemperature is also shown.

FIG. 7 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 lbs of fly ash (approximately 20%by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form(i.e., a Greencraft form) and a vertical conventional form over a 90-dayperiod. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 8 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) and avertical conventional form over a 90-day period.

FIG. 9 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraftform) and a vertical conventional form over a 90-day period. The ambienttemperature is also shown.

FIG. 10 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 of lbs of fly ash (approximately20% by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form(i.e., a Greencraft form) and a conventional vertical form over a 14-dayperiod.

FIG. 11 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) and avertical conventional form over a 14-day period.

FIG. 12 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraftform) and a vertical conventional form over a 14-day period.

FIG. 13 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 of lbs of fly ash (approximately20% by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form(i.e., a Greencraft form) and a conventional vertical form over a 28-dayperiod.

FIG. 14 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) and avertical conventional form over a 28-day period.

FIG. 15 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraftform) and a vertical conventional form over a 28-day period.

FIG. 16 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 of lbs of fly ash (approximately20% by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form(i.e., a Greencraft form) and a conventional vertical form over a 90-dayperiod.

FIG. 17 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) and avertical conventional form over a 90-day period.

FIG. 18 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a vertical insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraftform) and a vertical conventional form over a 90-day period.

FIG. 19 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 lbs of fly ash (approximately 20%by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a horizontal insulated concreteform (i.e., a Greencraft form) and a horizontal conventional form over a14-day period. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 20 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a horizontal insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) anda horizontal conventional form over a 14-day period.

FIG. 21 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a horizontal insulated concrete form (i.e., aGreencraft form) and a horizontal conventional form over a 14-dayperiod. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 22 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 lbs of fly ash (approximately 20%by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a horizontal insulated concreteform (i.e., a Greencraft form) and a horizontal conventional form over a28-day period. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 23 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a horizontal insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) anda horizontal conventional form over a 28-day period.

FIG. 24 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a horizontal insulated concrete form (i.e., aGreencraft form) and a horizontal conventional form over a 28-dayperiod. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 25 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 540 lbs of portland cement(approximately 80% by weight) and 120 lbs of fly ash (approximately 20%by weight) per cubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internaltemperature of this concrete in both a horizontal insulated concreteform (i.e., a Greencraft form) and a horizontal conventional form over a90-day period. The ambient temperature is also shown.

FIG. 26 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 325 lbs of portland cement (50%by weight) and 325 of lbs of fly ash (50% by weight) per cubic yard ofconcrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of this concrete inboth a horizontal insulated concrete form (i.e., a Greencraft form) anda horizontal conventional form over a 90-day period.

FIG. 27 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature of concretehaving a cement mixture of approximately 220 lbs of portland cement(approximately 34% by weight), 215 lbs of slag cement (approximately 33%by weight) and 215 of lbs of fly ash (approximately 33% by weight) percubic yard of concrete. The graph shows the internal temperature of thisconcrete in both a horizontal insulated concrete form (i.e., aGreencraft form) and a horizontal conventional form over a 90-dayperiod. The ambient temperature is also shown.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE DISCLOSED EMBODIMENTS

The present invention comprises a concrete mix for use in insulatedconcrete forms. An insulated concrete form provides the necessaryconditions for the concrete mix to cure more quickly and to achieve itsmaximum, or near maximum, strength potential. The insulated concreteform retains the heat of hydration produced by the concrete mix, therebyaccelerating the hydration reaction, the maturity or equivalent age andthe corresponding strength gain. The insulated concrete form alsoprevents, or reduces, short term temperature variations, such as hourlyor day-to-night temperature changes due to ambient temperaturefluctuations, thereby eliminating, or reducing, cracking ormicro-cracking of the concrete before the concrete reaches sufficientstrength for form removal, if the forms are to be removed. Furthermore,the insulated concrete form prevents a sharp drop of the temperature ofthe concrete mix after the initial heat generated by the hydrationreaction, thereby eliminating, or reducing, concrete thermal effects,which can also produce cracking and reduce other desirable physicalproperties. While these benefits are experienced to some degree byconventional portland cement-based concrete mixes, the concrete mixes ofthe present invention unexpectedly show enhanced physical propertieswhen cured, or at least partially cured, in insulated concrete formscompared to the same concrete mix cured in a conventional form.

The concrete mix of the present invention comprises cementitiousmaterial and aggregate. The plastic concrete mix in accordance with thepresent invention comprises cementitious material, aggregate and watersufficient to hydrate the cementitious material. The amount ofcementitious material used relative to the total weight of the concretevaries depending on the application and/or the strength of the concretedesired. Generally speaking, however, the cementitious materialcomprises approximately 25% to approximately 40% by weight of the totalweight of the concrete, exclusive of the water, or 500 lbs/yd³ ofconcrete (295 kg/m³) to 1,100 lbs/yd³ of concrete (650 kg/m³) ofconcrete. The water-to-cementitious material weight ratio is usuallyapproximately 0.25 to approximately 0.7. Relatively lowwater-to-cementitious material ratios lead to higher strength but lowerworkability, while relatively high water-to-cementitious material ratioslead to lower strength, but better workability. Aggregate usuallycomprises 70% to 80% by volume of the concrete. However, the relativeamount of cementitious material to aggregate to water is not a criticalfeature of the present invention; conventional amounts can be used. Thenovelty and nonobvious aspects of the present invention partiallyresides in the fact that when the heat of hydration is retained by aninsulated form the concrete is cured much faster and achieves theequivalent age of later stages of concrete formed in a conventional formmuch faster early on. In turn, this allows the use of far greateramounts of recycled supplemental cementitious materials, such as flyash, slag cement, rice husk ash, and the like, in lieu of ordinaryportland cement with equal or better concrete properties thanconventional mixes formed and cured in conventional forms usingconventional methods. Also, the novelty and nonobvious aspects of thepresent invention partially resides in the composition of thecementitious material and the associated curing of concrete containingthat cementitious material in an insulated concrete form. Nevertheless,sufficient cementitious material should be used to produce concrete withan ultimate compressive strength of at least 1,000 psi, preferably atleast 2,000 psi, more preferably at least 3,000 psi, most preferably atleast 4,000 psi, especially up to about 10,000 psi or more.

The aggregate used in the concrete used with the present invention isnot critical and can be any aggregate typically used in concrete. Theaggregate that is used in the concrete depends on the application and/orthe strength of the concrete desired. Such aggregate includes, but isnot limited to, fine aggregate, medium aggregate, coarse aggregate,sand, gravel, crushed stone, lightweight aggregate, recycled aggregate,such as from construction, demolition and excavation waste, and mixturesand combinations thereof.

The reinforcement of the concrete used with the present invention is nota critical aspect of the present invention and thus any type ofreinforcement required by design requirements can be used. Such types ofconcrete reinforcement include, but are not limited to, deformed steelbars, cables, post tensioned cables, pre-stressed cables, fibers, steelfibers, mineral fibers, synthetic fibers, carbon fibers, steel wirefibers, mesh, lath, and the like.

The preferred cementitious material for use with the present inventioncomprises portland cement; preferably portland cement and one of slagcement or fly ash; and more preferably portland cement, slag cement andfly ash. Slag cement is also known as ground granulated blast-furnaceslag (GGBFS). The cementitious material preferably comprises a reducedamount of portland cement and increased amounts of recycledsupplementary cementitious materials; i.e., slag cement and/or fly ash.This results in cementitious material and concrete that is moreenvironmentally friendly. The portland cement can also be replaced, inwhole or in part, by one or more cementitious materials other thanportland cement, slag cement or fly ash. Such other cementitious orpozzolanic materials include, but are not limited to, silica fume;metakaolin; rice hull (or rice husk) ash; ground burnt clay bricks;brick dust; bone ash; animal blood; clay; other siliceous, aluminous oraluminosiliceous materials that react with calcium hydroxide in thepresence of water; hydroxide-containing compounds, such as sodiumhydroxide, magnesium hydroxide, or any other compound having reactivehydrogen groups, other hydraulic cements and other pozzolanic materials.The portland cement can also be replaced, in whole or in part, by one ormore inert or filler materials other than portland cement, slag cementor fly ash. Such other inert or filler materials include, but are notlimited to limestone powder; calcium carbonate; titanium dioxide;quartz; or other finely divided minerals that densify the hydratedcement paste.

The preferred cementitious material of the present invention comprises0% to approximately 80% by weight portland cement. The range of 0% toapproximately 80% by weight portland cement includes all of theintermediate percentages; namely, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%,45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, and 75%. The cementitious material of thepresent invention can also comprise 0% to approximately 70% by weightportland cement, preferably 0% to approximately 60% by weight portlandcement, more preferably 0% to approximately 60% by weight portlandcement, most preferably 0% to approximately 50% by weight portlandcement, especially 0% to approximately 40% by weight portland cement,more especially 0% to approximately 30% by weight portland cement, mostespecially 0% to approximately 20% by weight portland cement or 0% toapproximately 10% by weight portland cement. In one disclosedembodiment, the cementitious material comprises approximately 10% toapproximately 45% by weight portland cement, more preferablyapproximately 10% to approximately 40% by weight portland cement, mostpreferably approximately 10% to approximately 35% by weight portlandcement, especially approximately 33⅓% by weight portland cement, mostespecially approximately 10% to approximately 30% by weight portlandcement. Thus, in another disclosed embodiment of the present invention,the cementitious material can comprise approximately 5%, approximately10%, approximately 15%, approximately 20%, approximately 25%,approximately 30%, approximately 35%, approximately 40%, approximately45% or approximately 50% by weight portland cement or anysub-combination thereof.

The preferred cementitious material for use in one disclosed embodimentof the present invention also comprises 0% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement, preferably approximately 20% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement, more preferably approximately 30% to approximately80% by weight slag cement, most preferably approximately 30% toapproximately 70% by weight slag cement, especially approximately 30% toapproximately 60% by weight slag cement, more especially approximately30% to approximately 50% by weight slag cement, most especiallyapproximately 30% to approximately 40% by weight slag cement. In anotherdisclosed embodiment the cementitious material comprises approximately33⅓% by weight slag cement. In another disclosed embodiment of thepresent invention, the cementitious material can comprise approximately5% by weight slag cement, approximately 10% by weight slag cement,approximately 15% by weight slag cement, approximately 20% by weightslag cement, approximately 25% by weight slag cement, approximately 30%by weight slag cement, approximately 35% by weight slag cement,approximately 40% by weight slag cement, approximately 45% by weightslag cement, approximately 50% by weight slag cement, approximately 55%by weight slag cement, approximately 60% by weight slag cement,approximately 65%, approximately 70% by weight slag cement,approximately 75% by weight slag cement, approximately 80% by weightslag cement, approximately 85% by weight slag cement or approximately90% by weight slag cement or any sub-combination thereof.

The preferred cementitious material for use in one disclosed embodimentof the present invention also comprises 0% to approximately 80% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 80% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 75% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 70% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 65% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 60% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 55% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 50% byweight fly ash, preferably approximately 10% to approximately 45% byweight fly ash, more preferably approximately 10% to approximately 40%by weight fly ash, most preferably approximately 10% to approximately35% by weight fly ash, especially approximately 33⅓% by weight fly ash.In another disclosed embodiment of the present invention, the preferredcementitious material comprises 0% by weight fly ash, approximately 5%by weight fly ash, approximately 10% by weight fly ash, approximately15% by weight fly ash, approximately 20% by weight fly ash,approximately 25% by weight fly ash, approximately 30% by weight flyash, approximately 35% by weight fly ash, approximately 40% by weightfly ash, approximately 45% by weight fly ash, approximately 50% byweight fly ash, approximately 55% by weight fly ash, approximately 60%by weight fly ash, approximately 65% by weight fly ash, approximately70% by weight fly ash, approximately 75% by weight fly ash,approximately 80% by weight fly ash or any sub-combination thereof.Preferably the fly ash has an average particle size of <10 μm; morepreferably 90% or more of the particles have a particles size of <10 μm.

The cementitious material for use in one disclosed embodiment of thepresent invention can optionally include 0.1% to approximately 10% byweight Wollastonite. Wollastonite is a calcium inosilicate mineral(CaSiO₃) that may contain small amounts of iron, magnesium, andmanganese substituted for calcium. In addition the cementitious materialcan optionally include 0.1-25% calcium oxide (quick lime), calciumhydroxide (hydrated lime), calcium carbonate or latex or polymeradmixtures, either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxylgroups.

The cementitious material for use in one disclosed embodiment of thepresent invention can also optionally include fillers, such as limestonepowder; calcium carbonate; titanium dioxide; quartz; or other finelydivided minerals that densify the hydrated cement paste. Specifically,inert fillers optionally can be used in the cementitious material of thepresent invention in amounts of 0% to approximately 40% by weight;preferably, approximately 5% to approximately 30% by weight. In onedisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 75% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement,approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash and 0% toapproximately 40% by weight inert filler. In another disclosedembodiment, the cementitious material for use with the present inventioncomprises approximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight portlandcement; at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;and 5% to approximately 40% by weight inert filler.

In one disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material in accordancewith the present invention comprises approximately equal parts by weightof portland cement, slag cement and fly ash; i.e., approximately 33⅓% byweight portland cement, approximately 33⅓% by weight slag cement andapproximately 33⅓% by weight fly ash. In another disclosed embodiment, apreferred cementitious material in accordance with the present inventionhas a weight ratio of portland cement to slag cement to fly ash of1:1:1. In another disclosed embodiment, the hydraulic cement inaccordance with the present invention has a weight ratio of portlandcement to slag cement to fly ash of approximately0.85-1.05:0.85-1.05:0.85-1.05, preferably approximately0.9-1.1:0.9-1.1:0.9-1.1, more preferably approximately0.95-1.05:0.95-1.05:0.95-1.05.

In one disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with thepresent invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 80% byweight portland cement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement, and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight flyash. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for usewith the present invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately70% by weight portland cement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement, and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weightfly ash. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material foruse with the present invention comprises approximately 10% toapproximately 60% by weight portland cement, approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement, and approximately 5% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash. In another disclosed embodiment,the cementitious material for use with the present invention comprisesapproximately 10% to approximately 50% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises less than 50% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 45% by weightportland cement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slagcement, and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. Inanother disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with thepresent invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 40% byweight portland cement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement, and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight flyash. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for usewith the present invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately35% by weight portland cement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement, and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weightfly ash.

In one disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with thepresent invention comprises 0% to approximately 100% by weight portlandcement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement,and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In onedisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 80% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 70% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 60% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 50% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 45% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 40% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises 0% to approximately 35% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement, andapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash.

In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use withthe present invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 70%by weight portland cement and at least one of approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement and approximately 5% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash. In another disclosed embodiment,the cementitious material for use with the present invention comprisesapproximately 10% to approximately 60% by weight portland cement and atleast one of approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slagcement and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash. Inanother disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with thepresent invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 50% byweight portland cement and at least one of approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement and approximately 5% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash. In another disclosed embodiment,the cementitious material for use with the present invention comprisesapproximately 10% to approximately 40% by weight portland cement and atleast one of approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slagcement and approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash.

In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use withthe present invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 90%by weight portland cement; approximately 10% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement; 0% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% to 10%by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% by weight calciumoxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures, either mineralor synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, or mixtures thereof.In one disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with thepresent invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 80% byweight portland cement; approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement; 0% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises approximately 10%to approximately 70% by weight portland cement; approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement; 0% to approximately 80% byweight fly ash; 0% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0%to approximately 25% by weight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, orlatex or polymer admixtures, either mineral or synthetic, that havereactive hydroxyl groups, or mixtures thereof. In another disclosedembodiment, the cementitious material for use with the present inventioncomprises approximately 10% to approximately 60% by weight portlandcement; approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement; 0%to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% to approximately 10% byweight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% by weight calciumoxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures, either mineralor synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, or mixtures thereof.In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use withthe present invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 50%by weight portland cement; approximately 10% to approximately 90% byweight slag cement; 0% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises less than 50% byweight portland cement; approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement; approximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;0% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately25% by weight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymeradmixtures, either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxylgroups, or mixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, thecementitious material for use with the present invention comprisesapproximately 10% to approximately 45% by weight portland cement;approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement; 10% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% to approximately 10% by weightWollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% by weight calcium oxide,calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures, either mineral orsynthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, or mixtures thereof. Inanother disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with thepresent invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 40% byweight portland cement; approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement; approximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;0% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately25% by weight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymeradmixtures, either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxylgroups, or mixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, thecementitious material for use with the present invention comprisesapproximately 10% to approximately 35% by weight portland cement;approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement;approximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof.

In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use withthe present invention comprises at least one of approximately 10% toapproximately 100% by weight portland cement, approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement or approximately 5% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% to 10% by weight Wollastonite;and 0% to approximately 25% by weight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide,or latex or polymer admixtures, either mineral or synthetic, that havereactive hydroxyl groups, or mixtures thereof. In one disclosedembodiment, the cementitious material for use with the present inventioncomprises at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 80% byweight portland cement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement or approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;0% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately25% by weight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymeradmixtures, either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxylgroups, or mixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, thecementitious material for use with the present invention comprises atleast one of approximately 10% to approximately 70% by weight portlandcement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises at least one ofapproximately 10% to approximately 60% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises at least one ofapproximately 10% to approximately 50% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises less than 50% byweight portland cement; approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement; approximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;0% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately25% by weight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymeradmixtures, either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxylgroups, or mixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, thecementitious material for use with the present invention comprises atleast one of approximately 10% to approximately 45% by weight portlandcement, approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises at least one ofapproximately 10% to approximately 40% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises at least one ofapproximately 10% to approximately 35% by weight portland cement,approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 10% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; 0% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite; and 0% to approximately 25% byweight calcium oxide, calcium hydroxide, or latex or polymer admixtures,either mineral or synthetic, that have reactive hydroxyl groups, ormixtures thereof.

In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use withthe present invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 90%by weight portland cement; at least one of approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement or approximately 5% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash; and 0.1% to 10% by weightWollastonite. In one disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material foruse with the present invention comprises approximately 10% toapproximately 80% by weight portland cement; at least one ofapproximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; and 0.1% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite. In another disclosedembodiment, the cementitious material for use with the present inventioncomprises approximately 10% to approximately 70% by weight portlandcement; at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement or approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;and 0.1% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 60% by weightportland cement; at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 90%by weight slag cement or approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weightfly ash; and 0.1% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite. Inanother disclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with thepresent invention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 50% byweight portland cement; at least one of approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement or approximately 5% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash; and 0.1% to approximately 10% byweight Wollastonite. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises less than 50% byweight portland cement; at least one of approximately 10% toapproximately 90% by weight slag cement or approximately 5% toapproximately 80% by weight fly ash; and 0.1% to approximately 10% byweight Wollastonite. In another disclosed embodiment, the cementitiousmaterial for use with the present invention comprises approximately 10%to approximately 45% by weight portland cement; at least one ofapproximately 10% to approximately 90% by weight slag cement orapproximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash; and 0.1% toapproximately 10% by weight Wollastonite. In another disclosedembodiment, the cementitious material for use with the present inventioncomprises approximately 10% to approximately 40% by weight portlandcement; at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 90% by weightslag cement or approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weight fly ash;and 0.1% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite. In anotherdisclosed embodiment, the cementitious material for use with the presentinvention comprises approximately 10% to approximately 35% by weightportland cement; at least one of approximately 10% to approximately 90%by weight slag cement or approximately 5% to approximately 80% by weightfly ash; and 0.1% to approximately 10% by weight Wollastonite.

The portland cement, slag cement and fly ash, and any othersupplementary cementitious material, can be combined physically ormechanically in any suitable manner and is not a critical feature of thepresent invention. For example, the portland cement, slag cement and flyash can be mixed together to form a uniform blend of dry material priorto combining with the aggregate and water. Or, the portland cement, slagcement and fly ash can be added separately to a conventional concretemixer, such as the transit mixer of a ready-mix concrete truck, at abatch plant. The water and aggregate can be added to the mixer beforethe cementitious material, however, it is preferable to add thecementitious material first, the water second, the aggregate third andany makeup water last.

Chemical admixtures can also be used with the concrete of the presentinvention. Such chemical admixtures include, but are not limited to,accelerators, retarders, air entrainments, plasticizers,superplasticizers, pigments, corrosion inhibitors, bonding agents andpumping aid. Although chemical admixtures can be used with the concreteof the present invention, it is believed that chemical admixtures arenot necessary.

Mineral admixtures or supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) canalso be used with the concrete of the present invention. Such mineraladmixtures include, but are not limited to, silica fume; metakaolin;rice hull (or rice husk) ash; ground burnt clay bricks; brick dust; boneash; animal blood; clay; other siliceous, aluminous or aluminosiliceousmaterials that react with calcium hydroxide in the presence of water;hydroxide-containing compounds, such as sodium hydroxide, magnesiumhydroxide, or any other compound having reactive hydrogen groups, otherhydraulic cements and other pozzolanic materials. Although mineraladmixtures can be used with the concrete of the present invention, it isbelieved that mineral admixtures are not necessary.

After the plastic concrete has been prepared, it is placed in aninsulated concrete form or mold where it is kept until the concrete isat least partially cured, and preferably completely cured. As usedherein, the term “completely cured” shall mean that the concrete hasattained at least 90% of its ultimate compressive strength. Mostpreferably, the concrete is kept in the insulated concrete form and theinsulated concrete form or mold becomes a permanent part of the concretestructure. However, for certain applications it may be desirable toremove, or partially remove, the concrete from the insulated concreteform or mold.

The insulated concrete form can be any insulated concrete form that issufficiently strong to hold the plastic concrete. Preferred insulatedconcrete forms are disclosed in applicant's patent application Ser. Nos.12/753,220 filed Apr. 2, 2010 (now Publication No. US 2011/0239566);13/247,133 filed Sep. 28, 2011 (now Publication No. US 2013/0074432) and13/247,256 filed Sep. 28, 2011 (now Publication No. US 2013/0074433)(the disclosures of which are all incorporated herein by reference intheir entirety). Modular insulated concrete form can also be used, suchas those disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,497,592; 5,809,725; 6,668,503;6,898,912 and 7,124,547 (the disclosures of which are all incorporatedherein by reference in their entirety). It is also specificallycontemplated that a conventional concrete form or mold can be made intoan insulated concrete form or mold by applying expanded polystyrene foamto the exterior of the conventional form or mold; see for example,applicant's co-pending patent application entitled “Insulated PlywoodConcrete Form and Method of Curing Concrete Using Same,” Ser. No.13/626,103 filed Sep. 25, 2012 and applicant's co-pending patentapplication entitled “Concrete Runways, Roads, Highways and Slabs onGrade and Methods of Making Same,” Ser. No. 13/626,540 filed Sep. 25,2012 (the disclosures of which are both incorporated herein by referencein their entirety). Alternatively, the insulating material can besprayed on the exterior surface of a reusable conventional form or moldin liquid form and then foamed in situ, such as by including a blowingagent in the liquid, such as a low-boiling liquid. Polymers that can besprayed on in liquid form and then foamed and cured in situ include, butare not limited to, polystyrene, polyurethane and other polymers wellknow to those skilled in the art. Thus, any form or mold known in theart for forming concrete, precast concrete, mortar or plaster structuresor objects can be made into an insulated concrete form or mold byapplying sufficient insulating material to the exterior of theconventional form or mold; i.e., the side of the form or mold that doesnot contact the concrete. An insulated blanket or electrically heatedblanket can also be used for a portion of the insulated concrete form ormold. Also, a conventional concrete form or mold can be partially orcompletely wrapped in insulating material, an insulated blanket or anelectrically heated blanket. The configuration of the form or mold isnot important to the present invention. What is important is that theinsulated concrete form holds in a sufficient amount of the heat ofhydration such that the properties of the present invention areachieved. Thus, the form or mold or the insulating material applied tothe form or mold must have sufficient insulating properties as specifiedbelow.

The insulated concrete form or mold used in a disclosed embodiment ofthe present invention has insulating properties equivalent to at least0.25 inches of expanded polystyrene foam, preferably equivalent to atleast 0.5 inches of expanded polystyrene foam, more preferablyequivalent to at least 1 inch of expanded polystyrene foam; mostpreferably equivalent to at least 2 inch of expanded polystyrene foam,especially equivalent to at least 3 inch of expanded polystyrene foam,most especially equivalent to at least 4 inch of expanded polystyrenefoam. There is no maximum thickness for the equivalent expandedpolystyrene foam. The maximum thickness is usually dictated byeconomics, ease of handling and building or structure design. However,for most applications a maximum equivalence of 8 inches of expandedpolystyrene foam can be used. In another embodiment of the presentinvention, the insulated concrete form has insulating propertiesequivalent to approximately 0.25 to approximately 8 inches of expandedpolystyrene foam, preferably approximately 0.5 to approximately 8 inchesof expanded polystyrene foam, preferably approximately 1 toapproximately 8 inches of expanded polystyrene foam, preferablyapproximately 2 to approximately 8 inches of expanded polystyrene foam,more preferably approximately 3 to approximately 8 inches of expandedpolystyrene foam, most preferably approximately 4 to approximately 8inches of expanded polystyrene foam. These ranges for the equivalentinsulating properties include all of the intermediate values. Thus, theinsulated concrete form used in another disclosed embodiment of thepresent invention has insulating properties equivalent to approximately0.25 inches of expanded polystyrene foam, equivalent to approximately0.5 inches of expanded polystyrene foam, equivalent to approximately 1inch of expanded polystyrene foam, approximately 2 inches of expandedpolystyrene foam, approximately 3 inches of expanded polystyrene foam,approximately 4 inches of expanded polystyrene foam, approximately 5inches of expanded polystyrene foam, approximately 6 inches of expandedpolystyrene foam, approximately 7 inches of expanded polystyrene foam,or approximately 8 inches of expanded polystyrene foam. Expandedpolystyrene foam has an R-value of approximately 4 to 5 per inchthickness. Therefore, the insulating material 344 should have an R-valueof greater than 1.5, preferably greater than 4, more preferably greaterthan 8, especially greater than 12, most especially greater than 20. Theinsulating concrete form or mold preferably has an R-value ofapproximately 1.5 to approximately 40; more preferably betweenapproximately 4 to approximately 40; especially approximately 8 toapproximately 40; more especially approximately 12 to approximately 40.The insulating material 344 preferably has an R-value of approximately1.5, more preferably approximately 4, most preferably approximately 8,especially approximately 20, more especially approximately 30, mostespecially approximately 40. Of course, different amounts of insulatingmaterials, different amounts of equivalent insulating materials ordifferent types of insulating materials can be used above and below ahorizontal concrete slab or for the interior vertical insulated concreteform and the exterior vertical insulated concrete form in accordancewith the present invention, as design requirement may require.

The insulated concrete form or mold can also be made from a refractoryinsulating material, such as a refractory blanket or a refractory board.Refractory insulation is typically used to line high temperaturefurnaces or to insulate high temperature pipes. Refractory insulatingmaterial is typically made from ceramic fibers made from materialsincluding, but not limited to, silica, silicon carbide, alumina,aluminum silicate, aluminum oxide, zirconia, calcium silicate; glassfibers, mineral wool fibers, and fireclay. Refractory insulatingmaterial is commercially available in bulk fiber, foam, blanket, board,felt and paper form. Refractory insulation is commercially available inblanket form as Fiberfrax Durablanket® insulation blanket from Unifrax ILLC, Niagara Falls, N.Y., USA and RSI4-Blank and RSI8-Blank fromRefractory Specialties Incorporated, Sebring, Ohio, USA. Refractoryinsulation is commercially available in board form as Duraboard® fromUnifrax I LLC, Niagara Falls, N.Y., USA and CS85, Marinite and Transiteboards from BNZ Materials Inc., Littleton, Colo., USA.

The insulated concrete form or mold can also be made in accordance withapplicant's patent application entitled “Insulated Concrete Form andMethod of Using Same,” Ser. No. 13/247,133 filed Sep. 28, 2011 (nowPublication No. US 2013/0074432) (the disclosure of which isincorporated herein by reference in its entirety); applicant'sco-pending patent application entitled “Method for ElectronicTemperature Controlled Curing of Concrete and Accelerating ConcreteMaturity or Equivalent Age, Precast Concrete Structures and Objects andApparatus for Same,” Ser. No. 13/626,075, filed Sep. 25, 2012 (thedisclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in itsentirety); applicant's co-pending patent application entitled “HighPerformance, Lightweight Precast Composite Concrete Panels and HighEnergy-Efficient Structures and Methods of Making Same,” Ser. No.13/626,087 filed Sep. 25, 2012 (the disclosure of which is incorporatedherein by reference in its entirety); and applicant's co-pending patentapplication entitled “Composite Insulated Plywood, Insulated PlywoodConcrete Form and Method of Curing Concrete Using Same,” Ser. No.13/626,103 filed Sep. 25, 2012 (the disclosure of which is incorporatedherein by reference in its entirety).

The concrete mix cured in an insulated concrete form in accordance withthe present invention produces concrete with superior early strength andultimate strength properties compared to the same concrete mix cured ina conventional form manner without the use of any chemical additives toaccelerate or otherwise alter the curing process. Thus, in one disclosedembodiment of the present invention, the cementitious material comprisesat least two of portland cement, slag cement and fly ash in amounts suchthat at three to seven days the concrete mix in accordance with thepresent invention in an insulated concrete form has a compressivestrength at least 25% or at least 50% greater than the same concrete mixwould have after the same time in a non-insulated concrete form underthe same conditions. In another disclosed embodiment, the concrete mixin an insulated concrete form has a compressive strength at least 100%,at least 150%, at least 200%, at least 250% or at least 300% greaterthan the same concrete mix would have after three to seven days in aconventional (i.e., non-insulated) concrete form under the sameconditions.

In another disclosed embodiment of the present invention, thecementitious material comprises portland cement, slag cement and fly ashin amounts such that at three to seven days the concrete mix inaccordance with the present invention in an insulated concrete form hasa compressive strength at least 25% or at least 50% greater than thesame concrete mix would have after the same amount of time in anon-insulated concrete form under the same conditions. In anotherdisclosed embodiment the concrete mix in an insulated concrete form hasa compressive strength at least 100%, at least 150%, at least 200%, atleast 250% or at least 300% greater than the same concrete mix wouldhave after three to seven days in a conventional (i.e., non-insulated)concrete form under the same conditions.

In another disclosed embodiment of the present invention, thecementitious material comprises portland cement and slag cement inamounts such that at three to seven days the concrete mix in accordancewith the present invention in an insulated concrete form has acompressive strength at least 25% or at least 50% greater than the sameconcrete mix would have after the same amount of time in a non-insulatedconcrete form under the same conditions. In another disclosed embodimentthe concrete mix in an insulated concrete form has a compressivestrength at least 100%, at least 150%, at least 200%, at least 250% orat least 300% greater than the same concrete mix would have after threeto seven days in a conventional (i.e., non-insulated) concrete formunder the same conditions.

In another disclosed embodiment of the present invention, thecementitious material comprises portland cement and fly ash in amountssuch that at three to seven days the concrete mix in accordance with thepresent invention in an insulated concrete form has a compressivestrength at least 25% or at least 50% greater than the same concrete mixwould have after the same amount of time in a non-insulated concreteform under the same conditions. In another disclosed embodiment theconcrete mix in an insulated concrete form has a compressive strength atleast 100%, at least 150%, at least 200%, at least 250% or at least 300%greater than the same concrete mix would have after three to seven daysin a conventional (i.e., non-insulated) concrete form under the sameconditions.

In another disclosed embodiment of the present invention, thecementitious material comprises any and all concrete mixes listed abovein the present invention containing portland cement and anysupplementary cementitious material in amounts such that at three toseven days the concrete mix in accordance with the present invention inan insulated concrete form has a compressive strength at least 25% or atleast 50% greater than the same concrete mix would have after the sameamount of time in a non-insulated concrete form under the sameconditions. In another disclosed embodiment the concrete mix in aninsulated concrete form has a compressive strength at least 100%, atleast 150%, at least 200%, at least 250% or at least 300% greater thanthe same concrete mix would have after three to seven days in aconventional (i.e., non-insulated) concrete form under the sameconditions.

In another disclosed embodiment of the present invention, thecementitious material comprises any and all concrete mixes listed abovein the present invention containing portland cement and anysupplementary cementitious material in amounts such that at three daysthe concrete mix in accordance with the present invention in aninsulated concrete form has a compressive strength (as measured by ASTM42) at least 65% of the compressive strength the same concrete mix wouldhave after 90 days in the same insulated concrete form under the sameconditions. In another disclosed embodiment at three days the concretemix in accordance with the present invention in an insulated concreteform has a compressive strength (as measured by ASTM 42) at least 70%,preferably at least 75%, more preferably at least 80% of the compressivestrength the same concrete mix would have after 90 days in the sameinsulated concrete form under the same conditions.

The following examples are illustrative of selected embodiments of thepresent invention and are not intended to limit the scope of theinvention.

Example 1

Six concrete forms were set up side-by-side to form vertical wallsections. The forms were erected outside during the spring and weresubjected to ambient weather and temperature conditions. Three formswere conventional 4 feet×8 feet aluminum forms. These forms were set foran eight-inch thick wall section. The other three forms were insulatedconcrete forms. Each insulated concrete forms was made from two 4 feet×8feet panels of expanded polystyrene foam spaced eight inches from eachother. The bottom and the side of the forms were also insulated but thetop of the form was left open to the environment. The concrete mixeswere batched at a local ready mix concrete batch plant and delivered tothe site by way of a conventional concrete truck. An independent testinglab technician from an accredited testing lab was present to sample theconcrete. Three different concrete mixes were prepared. The concretemixes employed three different cement formulations but were otherwisesimilar. No concrete additives of any kind were used in any of theseformulations, except a water-reducing superplasticizer admixture. Eachone of these three concrete formulations was designed to be a 4000 psicompressive strength at 28 days based upon the amount of thecementitious material contained in each formulation; i.e., 650-660 lbsper cubic yard. The three cement formulations are shown in Table 1below.

TABLE 1 Portland Slag Fly Total Cement Cement Cement Ash WeightFormulation lbs/yd³ lbs/yd³ lbs/yd³ lbs/yd³ No. concrete concreteconcrete concrete 1 540 120 660 2 325 325 650 3 220 215 215 650

Concrete made with Formulation No. 1 was placed in both a conventionalform and an insulated concrete form (i.e., Greencraft form) at the sametime. Similarly, concrete made with Formulation No. 2 was placed in botha conventional form and an insulated concrete form (i.e., Greencraftform) at the same time. And, concrete made with Formulation No. 3 wasplaced in both a conventional form and an insulated concrete form (i.e.,Greencraft form) at the same time.

Each concrete form was fitted with a temperature sensor with an internalmemory and microchip placed at approximately the middle of theeight-inch concrete receiving space defined by the form andapproximately four feet from the bottom. Another temperature sensor wasplaced outside the form, and out of direct sunlight or heat, to recordambient temperatures adjacent the forms. The concrete temperaturesensors were Intellirock II™ maturity/temperature loggers from Engius,LLC of Stillwater, Okla. The Intellirock II™ sensors were started by aconcrete technician from an independent, accredited concrete testinglab. The internal temperature of the concrete and the calculatedmaturity values (° C. Hrs) within each form was logged every hour for 90days.

FIGS. 1, 4 and 7 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature ofFormulation No. 1 in both a vertical conventional concrete form and avertical insulated concrete form over 14 day, 28 day and 90 day periods,respectively. The ambient temperature is also shown on the graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 1, 4 and 7, the concrete made with FormulationNo. 1 within the conventional form reached a maximum temperature ofapproximately 42° C. relatively quickly and returned to ambienttemperature within approximately one day. The concrete in theconventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately 10° C. on adaily basis closely tracking the change in ambient temperature.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 1 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 40° C. in about the same amountof time as the concrete in the conventional form. However, while thetemperature of the concrete in the conventional form began to drop fromits maximum temperature, the temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form continued to increase for a relatively longperiod of time until it reached a maximum temperature of approximately57° C. The internal temperature of the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form then slowly declined until it reached ambient temperatureafter approximately 14 days. For the remainder of the test period, theinternal temperature of the concrete in the insulated concrete formfluctuated little.

FIGS. 2, 5 and 8 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature of theconcrete made with Formulation No. 2 in both a vertical conventionalconcrete form and a vertical insulated concrete form over 14 day, 28 dayand 90 day periods, respectively. The ambient temperature is not shownon this graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 2, 5 and 8, the concrete made with FormulationNo. 2 within the conventional form reached a maximum temperature ofapproximately 27° C. relatively quickly and returned to ambienttemperature within approximately one day. The concrete in theconventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately 10° C. on adaily basis.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 2 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 27° C. in about the same amountof time as the concrete in the conventional form. However, while thetemperature of the concrete in the conventional form began to drop fromits maximum temperature, the temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form continued to increase for a relatively longperiod of time until it reached a maximum temperature of approximately46° C. The internal temperature of the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form maintained its maximum temperature for approximately 3days and then slowly declined until it reached ambient temperature afterapproximately 16 days. For the remainder of the test period, theinternal temperature of the concrete in the insulated concrete formfluctuated little.

FIGS. 3, 6 and 9 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature ofconcrete made with Formulation No. 3 in both a vertical conventionalconcrete form and a vertical insulated concrete form over 14 day, 28 dayand 90 day periods, respectively. The ambient temperature is also shownon this graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 3, 6 and 9, the concrete made with FormulationNo. 3 within the conventional form reached a maximum temperature ofapproximately 35° C. relatively quickly and returned to ambienttemperature within approximately one day. The concrete in theconventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately 5 to 15° C. ona daily basis.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 3 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 35° C. in slightly slower thanthe concrete in the conventional form. However, while the temperature ofthe concrete in the conventional form began to drop from its maximumtemperature, the temperature of the concrete in the insulated concreteform continued to increase for a relatively long period of time(approximately 2.5 days) until it reached a maximum temperature ofapproximately 39° C. The internal temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form maintained its maximum temperature forapproximately 2 days and then slowly declined until it reached ambienttemperature after approximately 14 days. For the remainder of the testperiod, the internal temperature of the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form fluctuated little.

Concrete maturity or “equivalent age” is graphically represented by thearea under the curves of the graphs shown in FIGS. 1-27. Therefore, ifthe area under the curve has a greater area, it will also have a greaterconcrete maturity or equivalent age. For example, in FIG. 1 it caneasily be seen that the area under the curve for Formulation No. 1 inthe insulated Greencraft form is greater than the area under the curvefor Formulation No. 1 in the non-insulated form. As similar analysis caneasily be made for the other concrete formulations shown in FIGS. 1-27.

Example 2

As stated above, maturity of concrete is measured as “equivalent age”and is given in temperature degrees×hours (either ° C.-Hrs or ° F.-Hrs).The concrete maturity was measured by the Intellirock II™maturity/temperature loggers used in each of the six vertical wallsections identified above in Example 1. A summary of this test data isshown in Table 2 below.

TABLE 2 ASTM C-42 Vertical Forms Coring Conventional vs. GreencraftForms Testing: Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) Formulation No. 1Formulation No. 2 Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated ConventionalInsulated Conventional Insulated Actual Age Form Greencraft FormGreencraft Form Greencraft Age Age Maturity Maturity Maturity MaturityMaturity Maturity (days) (hours) ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs 0.33 8 273 252 206 221 220 189 0.75 18 574 763 414 620513 506 1 24 656 1096 530 883 602 715 2 48 954 2441 1060 1985 911 1606 372 1340 3683 1600 3071 1299 2535 7 168 3524 7589 3511 6705 3391 5441 14336 6512 12116 5323 10415 6331 10848 28 672 13987 19620 10749 1607713962 18500 56 1344 29610 35571 24630 30180 30034 34308 90 2160 5268859632 46259 52356 53604 58166

This test data shows greater concrete maturity, i.e. equivalent age, forthe concrete cured in the insulated concrete forms compared to the sameconcrete formulation cured in the conventional form. For example, at day1 Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form had a maturity orequivalent age of 656° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in theinsulated form had a maturity or equivalent age of 1096° C.-Hrs orgreater concrete maturity or equivalent age for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. At day 2 Formulation No. 1 in the conventionalform had a maturity or equivalent age of 954° C.-Hrs; whereas,Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturity or equivalent ageof 2441° C.-Hrs or 155% greater concrete maturity or equivalent age forthe concrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 3 Formulation No. 1in the conventional form had a maturity or equivalent age of 1340°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturityor equivalent age of 3683° C.-Hrs or 174% greater concrete maturity forthe concrete in the insulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form had a maturity or equivalentage of 3524° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in the insulated formhad a maturity or equivalent age of 7589° C.-Hrs or 115% greaterconcrete maturity or equivalent age for the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form. At day 28 Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form hada maturity or equivalent age of 13987° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No.1 in the insulated form had a maturity or equivalent age of 19620°C.-Hrs or 40% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. At day 90 Formulation No. 1 in the conventionalform had a maturity or equivalent age of 52,688° C.-Hrs; whereas,Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturity or equivalent ageof 59632° C.-Hrs or 13% greater concrete maturity or equivalent age forthe concrete in the insulated concrete form.

At day 2 Formulation No. 2 in the conventional form had a maturity orequivalent age of 1060° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 2 in theinsulated form had a maturity or equivalent age of 1985° C.-Hrs or 87%greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulated concreteform. For example, at day 3 Formulation No. 2 in the conventional formhad a maturity or equivalent age of 1600° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 2 in the insulated form had a maturity or equivalent age of 3071°C.-Hrs or 91% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7 Formulation No. 2 in theconventional form had a maturity or equivalent age of 3511° C.-Hrs;whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had a maturity orequivalent age of 6705° C.-Hrs or 90% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 28 Formulation No. 2 inthe conventional form had a maturity or equivalent age of 10749° C.-Hrs;whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had a maturity orequivalent age of 16077° C.-Hrs or 49% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 90 Formulation No. 2 inthe conventional form had a maturity or equivalent age of 46259° C.-Hrs;whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had a maturity orequivalent age of 52356° C.-Hrs or 13% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form.

At day 2 Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of911° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had amaturity of 1606° C.-Hrs or 76% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form. For example, at day 3Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of 1299°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had a maturityof 2535° C.-Hrs or 95% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7 Formulation No. 3 in theconventional form had a maturity of 3391° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 3 in the insulated form had a maturity of 5441° C.-Hrs or 60%greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulated concreteform. At day 28 Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had amaturity of 13962° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulatedform had a maturity of 18500° C.-Hrs or 32% greater concrete maturityfor the concrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 90 FormulationNo. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of 53604° C.-Hrs; whereas,Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had a maturity of 58166° C.-Hrsor 8% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form.

Example 3

In accordance with ASTM 42, cored samples of the concrete from eachdifferent form described above in Example 2 were cored and tested by anindependent testing laboratory for determining compressive strength. Thecored samples of the concrete were tested at 9 days, 28 days, 58 days,90 days and 14 months. A summary of this test data is shown below inTable 3 below.

TABLE 3 Compressive Strength (psi) Formulation 9 28 58 90 14 No. FormType Days Days Days Days Months 1 Insulated 6,180 6,610 6,860 6,8907,980 Conventional 3,240 4,660 5,640 6,190 6,810 2 Insulated 1,790 2,1701,780 4,570 3,460 Conventional 660 1,190 2,120 2,090 2,180 3 Insulated5,080 5,880 6,230 6,640 7,520 Conventional 1,470 3,930 4,850 5,635 5,830

The test data shown in Table 5 above surprisingly and unexpectedly showsthat the formulations cured in insulated concrete forms achieved greaterstrength, and particularly higher early concrete strength, than the sameconcrete cured in conventional forms. Specifically, at day 9 FormulationNo. 1 had 191% higher compressive strength in the insulated concreteform compared to Formulation No. 1 in the conventional concrete form. Atday 9 Formulation 2 had 271% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 2 in theconventional concrete form. And, at day 9 Formulation 3 had 245% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 3 in the conventional concrete form.

At day 28, Formulation No. 1 had 90% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At day 28, Formulation No. 2 had 82% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 2 in the conventional concrete form. And, at day 28,Formulation No. 3 had 49% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concreteform.

At day 58, Formulation No. 1 had 21% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At day 58, Formulation No. 2 is an anomalydue to air voids in the concrete. And, at day 58, Formulation No. 3 had28% higher compressive strength in the insulated concrete form comparedto Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concrete form.

At day 90, Formulation No. 1 had 11% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At day 90, Formulation No. 2 had 118% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 2 in the conventional concrete form. And, at day 90,Formulation No. 3 had 17% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concreteform.

At 14 months, Formulation No. 1 had 17% higher compressive strength inthe insulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At 1 year, Formulation No. 2 had 58% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 2 in the conventional concrete form. And, at 1 year,Formulation No. 3 had 28% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concreteform.

Example 4

Sample test cylinders of each of the three concrete formulation listedin Example 1 above were prepared by an independent, accredited concretetesting laboratory, cured under laboratory conditions and tested forcompressive strength according to ASTM C-39. Each of these testcylinders was prepared from the same concrete batch placed respectivelyin each of the test panel forms discussed above in Examples 2 and 3. Asummary of this test data is shown below in Table 4 below, in additionto the numerous testing cylinders used for testing compressive strengthat various points in time, for each of the three concrete formulationstwo cylinders were fitted each with an Intellirock II™maturity/temperature loggers and cured with the testing cylinders.Therefore, all cylinders were made and cured under the same conditions.At each point in time two cylinders were tested for compressive strengthand the results were averaged.

TABLE 4 ASTM C-39 Lab Curing and Testing: Compressive StrengthFormulation 1 Formulation 2 Formulation 3 (540 lbs OPC, (325 lbs OPC,(220 lbs OPC, 215 lbs SC, 120 lbs FA) 325 lbs FA) 215 lbs FA) AverageAverage Average Testing Age Compressive Compressive CompressiveCompressive Compressive Compressive Age Age Strength Strength StrengthStrength Strength Strength (days) (hours) (psi) (psi) (psi) (psi) (psi)(psi) 0.33 8 290 300 140 140 0 0 310 140 0 0.75 18 1190 1190 445 450 210210 1190 450 210 1 24 1190 1300 520 530 210 220 1410 530 220 2 48 17601860 840 840 300 320 1950 840 330 3 72 2560 2410 960 950 430 450 2260940 470 7 168 2800 2930 1140 1190 710 660 3060 1240 610 14 336 3440 33701600 1560 1130 1100 3300 1510 1070 28 672 5630 5555 2210 2180 3700 38305480 2150 3960 56 1344 6010 5960 3050 3080 6430 6530 5910 3100 6620 902160 7410 7360 3780 3695 7480 7310 7310 3610 7140

The test results in Table 4 show that the concrete formulations inaccordance with the present invention have very poor early strength whencured according to ASTM C-39; i.e., at 72° F. under water. For example,at day 3, the cylinders made from Formulation No. 1 had an averagecompressive strength of 2410 psi. At day 3, the cylinders made fromFormulation No. 22 had an average compressive strength of 950 psi. Atday 3, the cylinders made from Formulation No. 3 had an averagecompressive strength of 450 psi, Construction practice requires thatconcrete have at least 2,500 psi before concrete forms can be strippedand generally the specified compressive strength at 28 days until thefull designed loads can be placed on concrete structures, such as walls,column, beams, slabs, and the like, without any additional shoring orre-shoring. While concrete made with Formulation 1 achieve the specifiedcompressive strength before 28 days, neither concrete made withformulation 2 and 3 achieved the specified strength before 28 days. Infact concrete made with Formulation 2 did not seem to achieve the 4,000psi specified strength even at 90 days. Concrete made with FormulationNos. 2 and 3, cured in the laboratory at 72° F. under water and testedin accordance to the ASTM C-39, achieved the necessary compressivestrength required for the form to be stripped at approximately 20 to 40days depending on the mix. Also, concrete made with Formulation Nos. 2and 3, cured in the laboratory at 72° F. under water and tested inaccordance to the ASTM C-39, achieved the 4000 psi necessary compressivestrength required to allow loads to be placed upon them at approximately40 to over 90 days depending on the mix. Based on this data, a buildingwould take many times longer to build and the cost associated with suchschedule delays waiting for concrete to gain sufficient strength wouldincrease significantly. While concrete mixes made of Formulation 1 maygenerally be specified and can be used in current constructionpractices, concrete made of Formulation Nos. 2 and 3 are usually neverspecified or used in conventional construction practice. Of course,concrete made of Formulation No. 1 placed in an insulated form will havea greater maturity or equivalent age and therefore strength gain at day3 compared with the same concrete formulation placed in a conventionalform. This increase in maturity or equivalent age, and correspondingincreased in strength, will help accelerate construction schedules andit will replace additional costly additive used to otherwise achieve thesame strength when placed in a state of the art form(conventional/non-insulated) used in current construction practice.These tests clearly demonstrate why the concrete formulations of thepresent invention, especially Formulation Nos. 2 and 3, are not often,if ever, used in current construction practice.

Example 5

The concrete maturity for each of the three concrete formulation testcylinders cured according to ASTM C-39 as shown in Example 4 above wasmeasured by the Intellirock II™ maturity/temperature loggers. A summaryof this test data is shown below in Table 5 below.

TABLE 5 ASTM C-39 Lab Curing and Testing: Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs)Formulation No. 1 Formulation No. 2 Formulation No. 3 Maturity (540 lbsOPC, (325 lbs OPC, (220 lbs PC, 215 lbs SC, Age 120 lbs FA) 325 lbs FA)215 lbs FA) Age Age Maturity Maturity Maturity (days) (hours) Temp. ° C.° C.-Hrs Temp. ° C. ° C.-Hrs Temp. ° C. ° C.-Hrs 0.33 8 32 218.5 28205.5 26 199 0.75 18 22.5 495.5 22.5 459.5 22 464.5 1 24 21.5 623 21586.5 21 570 2 48 18.5 1070.5 21.5 1091.5 19 1018.5 3 72 19 1523.5 21.51615.5 19 1474 7 168 17.5 3263.5 21 3570.5 18 3220 14 336 14 5918.5 217050 14 5882.5 28 672 23 13544.5 23 14277 23 13485 56 1344 24 29422.5 2129117 24 29279 90 2160 22.5 48615 21 46671.5 22 48429

A comparison of the maturity, or the equivalent age, of three concreteformulations cured in the test cylinders according to ASTM C-39 and thematurity of the three concrete formulations cured in the insulatedconcrete form, shown in Example 2 above, dramatically demonstrate thatthe concrete cured in the insulated concrete form matured or aged muchfaster. For example, at day 3 for Formulation No. 1 the ASTM C-39cylinder had a maturity, or equivalent age, of 1523.5° C.-Hrs; whereas,Formulation No. 1 in the insulated concrete form had a maturity, orequivalent age, of 3683° C.-Hrs (Table 2). At day 3 for Formulation No.2 the ASTM C-39 cylinder had a maturity, or equivalent age, of 1615.5°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated concrete form had amaturity, or equivalent age, of 3071° C.-Hrs (Table 2). At day 3 forFormulation No. 3 the ASTM C-39 cylinder had a maturity, or equivalentage, of 1474° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulatedconcrete form had a maturity, or equivalent age, of 2535° C.-Hrs (Table2). Similarly, at day 7 for Formulation No. 1 the ASTM C-39 cylinder hada maturity, or equivalent age, of 3263.5° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 1 in the insulated concrete form had a maturity, or equivalent age,of 7589° C.-Hrs (Table 2). At day 7 for Formulation No. 2 the ASTM C-39cylinder had a maturity, or equivalent age, of 3570.5° C.-Hrs; whereas,Formulation No. 2 in the insulated concrete form had a maturity, orequivalent age, of 6705° C.-Hrs (Table 2). At day 7 for Formulation No.3 the ASTM C-39 cylinder had a maturity, or equivalent age, of 3220°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulated concrete form had amaturity, or equivalent age, of 5441° C.-Hrs (Table 2). Clearly, theinsulated concrete form in accordance with the present inventionaccelerates the concrete curing process. This accelerated concretecuring or aging is believed to be caused by, inter alia, retaining theheat of hydration through the use of an insulated concrete form. The useof insulated concrete forms thus makes it practical to use concretemixes and formulations using substantial amounts of recycledsupplementary cementitious materials, such as fly ash and slag cement,while still being able to cure and achieve compressive strengthsdemanded by current construction projects and schedules which otherwisecould not be obtained using state of the art concrete forms (i.e.,conventional/non-insulated). Based on this data, a building would takemany times longer to build and the cost associated with the scheduledelays waiting for concrete to gain strength would increasesignificantly. While concrete mixes made of Formulation No. 1 maygenerally be specified and can be used in current constructionpractices, concrete made of Formulation Nos. 2 and 3 are never specifiedor used in current construction practices. Of course, concrete made ofFormulation No. 1 placed in an insulated form will have a greatermaturity or equivalent age and therefore strength gain at day 3 comparedwith the same concrete formulation placed in a conventional form. Thisincrease in maturity or equivalent age, and corresponding increased instrength, will help accelerate construction schedules and it willreplace additional costly additive used to otherwise achieve the samestrength when placed in a state of the art form(conventional/non-insulated) used in current construction practice.These tests clearly demonstrate why the concrete formulations of thepresent invention, especially Formulation Nos. 2 and 3, are not often,if ever, used in current construction practice.

Example 6

Six vertical concrete forms were set up side-by-side to form verticalwall sections. The forms were erected outside and were subjected toambient weather and temperature conditions. Three forms wereconventional 4 feet×8 feet plywood forms. These forms were set for aneight-inch thick wall section. The other three forms were insulatedconcrete forms (i.e., Greencraft form). Each insulated concrete form wasmade from two 4 feet×8 feet panels of expanded polystyrene foam spacedeight inches from each other. The bottom and the sides of the forms werealso insulated with expanded polystyrene foam and the top of the formwas covered with the same amount of expanded polystyrene foam once theconcrete was placed in the form. Three different concrete mixes wereprepared. The concrete mixes employed three different cementformulations but were otherwise similar. No concrete additives of anykind were used in any of these formulations, except a water-reducingsuperplasticizer admixture. The three cement formulations are shown inTable 1 above. Ambient temperatures for this test were seasonally higherfor this test than the test reported in Examples 2 and 3 above.

Concrete made with Formulation No. 1 was placed in both a verticalconventional form and a vertical insulated concrete form. Similarly,concrete made with Formulation No. 2 was placed in both a conventionalform and an insulated concrete form. And, concrete made with FormulationNo. 3 was placed in both a conventional form and an insulated concreteform.

Each concrete form was fitted with a temperature sensor with an internalmemory and microchip placed at approximately the middle of theeight-inch concrete receiving space defined by the form andapproximately four feet from the bottom of the form. Another temperaturesensor was placed outside the form to record ambient temperaturesadjacent the forms out of direct sunlight. The concrete temperaturesensors were Intellirock II™ maturity/temperature loggers from Engius,LLC of Stillwater, Okla. The internal temperature of the concrete andthe calculated maturity values (° C. Hrs) within each form was loggedevery hour for 90 days.

FIGS. 10, 13 and 16 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature ofFormulation No. 1 in both a vertical conventional concrete form and avertical insulated concrete form, as described above, over 14 day, 28day and 90 day periods, respectively. The ambient temperature is alsoshown on the graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 10, 13 and 16, the concrete made withFormulation No. 1 within the conventional form reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 50° C. on day 1 and returned to ambienttemperature at the end of day 2. The concrete in the conventionalconcrete form then fluctuated from approximately 2 to 10° C. on a dailybasis closely tracking the change in ambient temperature for the entire90-day test period.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 1 within the horizontal insulatedconcrete form reached an internal temperature of approximately 67° C.over a period of about 24 hours. However, while the temperature of theconcrete in the conventional form began to drop from its maximumtemperature, the temperature of the concrete in the insulated concreteform maintained a higher temperature for a relatively long period oftime (approximately 2 days). The internal temperature of the concrete inthe insulated concrete form then slowly declined until it reachedambient temperature after approximately 14 days. For the remained of the90 day test period, the internal temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form fluctuated little.

FIGS. 11, 14 and 17 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature ofthe concrete made with Formulation No. 2 in both a conventionalhorizontal concrete form and a horizontal insulated concrete form, asdescribed above, over 14 day, 28 day and 90 day periods, respectively.The ambient temperature is also shown on this graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 11, 14 and 17, the concrete made withFormulation No. 2 within the conventional form reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 37° C. relatively quickly and returned toapproximately ambient temperature within approximately one day. Theconcrete in the conventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately2 to 10° C. on a daily basis for the entire 90-day test period.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 2 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 32° C. in about the same amountof time as the concrete in the conventional form. However, while thetemperature of the concrete in the conventional form began to drop fromits maximum temperature, the temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form continued to increase for a relatively longperiod of time until it reached a maximum temperature of approximately51° C. The internal temperature of the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form then slowly declined until it reached ambient temperatureafter approximately 10 days. For the remainder of the 90-day testperiod, the internal temperature of the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form fluctuated little.

FIGS. 12, 15 and 18 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature ofconcrete made with Formulation No. 3 in both a horizontal conventionalconcrete form and a horizontal insulated concrete form, as describedabove, over 14 day, 28 day and 90 day periods, respectively. The ambienttemperature is also shown on this graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 12, 15 and 18, the concrete made withFormulation No. 3 within the conventional form reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 36° C. relatively quickly and returned toapproximately ambient temperature within approximately two days. Theconcrete in the conventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately2 to 10° C. on a daily basis for the remainder of the 90-day testperiod.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 3 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 36° C. in about the same amountof time as the concrete in the conventional form. However, while thetemperature of the concrete in the conventional form began to drop fromits maximum temperature, the temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form continued to increase for a relatively longperiod of time (approximately 24 hours) until it reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 58° C. The internal temperature of theconcrete in the insulated concrete form then slowly declined until itreached ambient temperature after approximately 12 days. For theremained of the 90-day test period, the internal temperature of theconcrete in the insulated concrete form fluctuated little.

Example 7

The concrete maturity for the six vertical wall sections identifiedabove in Example 6 was measured by the Intellirock II™maturity/temperature loggers. A summary of this test data is shown inTable 6 below.

TABLE 6 ASTM C-42 Vertical Forms Field Coring Conventional vs.Greencraft Forms Testing: Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) Formulation No. 1Formulation No. 2 Formulation No. 3 Maturity Conventional InsulatedConventional Insulated Conventional Insulated Age Form Greencraft FormGreencraft Form Greencraft Age Age Maturity Maturity Maturity MaturityMaturity Maturity (days) (hours) ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs 0.33 8 340 370 244 256 261 267 0.75 18 807 990 599 683604 705 1 24 1056 1379 796 958 807 996 2 48 1873 2952 1545 2129 15572325 3 72 2540 4434 2238 3325 2216 3640 7 168 4909 9133 4702 7334 46397776 14 336 9502 15131 9540 12823 9300 13288 28 672 20025 25785 2001423102 19911 23877 56 1344 40049 45579 39217 41995 40286 44393 90 216062096 67395 60410 63119 62661 67143

This test data in Table 6 above shows greater concrete maturity, orequivalent age, for the concrete cured in the insulated concrete formscompared to the same concrete formulation cured in the conventionalform. For example, at day 1 Formulation No. 1 in the conventional formhad a maturity of 1056° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in theinsulated form had a maturity of 1379° C.-Hrs or 30% greater concretematurity for the concrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 2Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form had a maturity of 1873°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturityof 2952° C.-Hrs or 57% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. At day 3 Formulation No. 1 in the conventionalform had a maturity of 2540° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in theinsulated form had a maturity of 4434° C.-Hrs or 74% greater concretematurity for the concrete in the insulated concrete form. Similarly, atday 7 Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form had a maturity of 4909°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturityof 9133° C.-Hrs or 86% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. At day 28 Formulation No. 1 in the conventionalform had a maturity of 20025° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in theinsulated form had a maturity of 25785° C.-Hrs or 28% greater concretematurity for the concrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 90Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form had a maturity of 62096°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturityof 67395° C.-Hrs or 8% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form.

At day 2 Formulation No. 2 in the conventional form had a maturity of1545° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had amaturity of 2129° C.-Hrs or 37% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form. For example, at day 3Formulation No. 2 in the conventional form had a maturity of 2238°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had a maturityof 3325° C.-Hrs or 48% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7 Formulation No. 2 in theconventional form had a maturity of 4702° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 2 in the insulated form had a maturity of 7334° C.-Hrs or 56%greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulated concreteform. At day 28 Formulation No. 2 in the conventional form had amaturity of 20014° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulatedform had a maturity of 23102° C.-Hrs or 15% greater concrete maturityfor the concrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 90 FormulationNo. 2 in the conventional form had a maturity of 60410° C.-Hrs; whereas,Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had a maturity of 63119° C.-Hrsor 4% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form.

At day 2 Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of1557° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had amaturity of 2325° C.-Hrs or 49% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form. For example, at day 3Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of 2216°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had a maturityof 3640° C.-Hrs or 64% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7 Formulation No. 3 in theconventional form had a maturity of 4639° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 3 in the insulated form had a maturity of 7776° C.-Hrs or 67%greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulated concreteform. At day 28 Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had amaturity of 19911° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulatedform had a maturity of 23877° C.-Hrs or 19% greater concrete maturityfor the concrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 90 FormulationNo. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of 62661° C.-Hrs; whereas,Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had a maturity of 67143° C.-Hrsor 7% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form.

Example 8

In accordance with ASTM 42, cored samples of the concrete from eachdifferent form described above in Example 7 were cored and tested by anindependent testing laboratory for determining compressive strengthaccording to ASTM C-42. The cored samples of the concrete were tested at3 days, 7 days, 2.8 days and 90 days. A summary of this test data isshown below in Table 7 below.

TABLE 7 Formulation Vertical Compressive Strength (psi) No. Form Type 3Days 7 Days 28 Days 90 Days 1 Insulated 4,560 5,640 6,310 6,450Conventional 3,470 3,970 5,430 6,530 2 Insulated 2,660 3,700 5,080 5,510Conventional 1,320 1,670 4,300 5,390 3 Insulated 4,530 5,380 6,110 6,490Conventional 1,290 2,440 5,520 5,450

The test data from Table 7 above surprisingly and unexpectedly showsthat the formulations cured in insulated concrete forms achieved greaterstrength, and particularly higher early concrete strength, than the sameconcrete cured in conventional forms. Specifically, at day 3 FormulationNo. 1 had 31% higher compressive strength in the insulated concrete formcompared to Formulation No. 1 in the conventional concrete form. At day3 Formulation 2 had 101% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 2 in the conventional concreteform. And, at day 3 Formulation 3 had 251% higher compressive strengthin the insulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 in theconventional concrete form.

At day 7, Formulation No. 1 had 42% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At day 7, Formulation No. 2 had 121% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 2 in the conventional concrete form. And, at day 7,Formulation No. 3 had 120% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concreteform.

At day 28, Formulation No. 1 had 16% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At day 28, Formulation No. 2 had 18% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 2 in the conventional concrete form. And, at day 28,Formulation No. 3 had 10% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concreteform.

At day 90, the results for Formulation No. 1 appear to be an anomaly orincorrect. At day 90, Formulation No. 2 had 18% higher compressivestrength in the insulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 inthe conventional concrete form. And, at day 90, Formulation No. 3 had19% higher compressive strength in the insulated concrete form comparedto Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concrete form.

The foregoing Examples 2 through 8 were all performed using verticalelevated concrete forms, such as are used to form vertical walls orcolumns. However, the present invention can also be used with horizontalforms, such as are used to form a slab on grade or a tilt-up concretepanel, or with a mold that is insulated on all sides. The followingExample 9, 10 and 11 describe the present invention used in a horizontalinsulated concrete form, such as for a slab on grade, as disclosed inapplicant's co-pending patent application entitled “Concrete Runways,Roads, Highways And Slabs On Grade And Methods Of Making Same,” Ser. No.13/626,540 filed Sep. 25, 2012 and tilt-up precast panels, as disclosedin applicant's co-pending patent application Ser. No. 13/247,256 filedSep. 28, 2011 (the disclosure of which are both incorporated herein byreference in their entirety). The present invention can also be used formaking tilt-up concrete panels, such as disclosed in applicant'sco-pending patent application Ser. No. 13/247,256 filed Sep. 28, 2011(the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in itsentirety).

Example 9

Six horizontal concrete forms were set up side-by-side to form slabs ongrade. The forms were erected outside, on the ground and were subjectedto ambient weather and temperature conditions. Three forms wereconventional 2 feet×8 feet wood forms. These forms were set for asix-inch thick slab on grade or precast such as tilt-up wall slab.Underneath each form a 6 mil polyethylene plastic sheeting wasinstalled. Concrete placed in the conventional form was placed directlyon the plastic sheeting and no covering was placed on the top surface ofthe concrete, except a 6 mil polyethylene plastic sheet to preventmoisture loss to the air. The other three forms were insulated concreteforms (i.e., Greencraft forms). The insulated concrete forms includedconventional wood sides. However, each insulated concrete forms alsoincluded two 2 feet×8 feet panels of 4 inch thick expanded polystyrenefoam. One of the expanded polystyrene foam panels was placed on theground and formed the bottom of the form; the other expanded polystyrenefoam panel was placed on the top surface of the concrete after theconcrete was placed and finished and additional foam pieces were used toinsulate the four sides of the 6 inch concrete slab. Thus, in theinsulated concrete form, the concrete slab was insulated on the top,sides and bottom with 4 inches of expanded polystyrene foam. Ambienttemperatures for this test were seasonally higher for this test than thetest reported in Examples 2-3 and 6-8 above.

Three different concrete mixes were prepared; i.e., the same threeformulations as shown in Example 1 above. Concrete made with FormulationNo. 1 was placed in both a horizontal conventional form and a horizontalinsulated concrete form. Similarly, concrete made with Formulation No. 2was placed in both a horizontal conventional form and a horizontalinsulated concrete form. And, concrete made with Formulation No. 3 wasplaced in both a horizontal conventional form and a horizontal insulatedconcrete form, as described above.

Each concrete form was fitted with a temperature sensor with an internalmemory and microchip placed at approximately the middle of the six-inchconcrete receiving space defined by the form and in the center of the 4feet by 8 feet form.

Another temperature sensor was placed outside the form to record ambienttemperatures adjacent the forms. The concrete temperature sensors wereIntellirock II™ maturity/temperature loggers from Engius, LLC ofStillwater, Okla. The internal temperature of the concrete andcalculated maturity values (° C. Hrs) within each form were logged everyhour for 90 days.

FIGS. 19, 22 and 25 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature ofFormulation No. 1 in both a conventional horizontal concrete form and ahorizontal insulated concrete form. The ambient temperature is alsoshown on the graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 19, 22 and 25, the concrete made withFormulation No. 1 within the conventional form reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 43° C. relatively quickly and returned toapproximately ambient temperature within approximately one day. Theconcrete in the conventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately3 to 20° C. on a daily basis closely tracking the change in ambienttemperature.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 1 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 43° C. in about the same amountof time as the concrete in the conventional form. However, while thetemperature of the concrete in the conventional form began to drop fromits maximum temperature, the temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form continued to increase for a relatively longperiod of time until it reached a maximum temperature of approximately66° C. The internal temperature of the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form then slowly declined until it reached ambient temperatureafter approximately 10 days. For the remainder of the 90-day testperiod, the internal temperature of the concrete in the insulatedconcrete form fluctuated little.

FIGS. 20, 23 and 26 are graphs of the internal concrete temperature ofthe concrete made with Formulation No. 2 in both a conventionalhorizontal concrete form and a horizontal insulated concrete form inaccordance with the present invention. The ambient temperature is alsoshown on this graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 20, 23 and 26, the concrete made withFormulation No. 2 within the conventional form reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 31° C. relatively quickly and returned toapproximately ambient temperature within approximately one day. Theconcrete in the conventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately5 to 18° C. on a daily basis.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 2 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 31° C. in about the same amountof time as the concrete in the conventional form. However, while thetemperature of the concrete in the conventional form began to drop fromits maximum temperature, the temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form continued to increase for a relatively longperiod of time (approximately two days) until it reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 46° C. The internal temperature of theconcrete in the insulated concrete form then slowly declined until itreached ambient temperature after approximately 6 days. For theremainder of the 90-day test period, the internal temperature of theconcrete in the insulated concrete form fluctuated little.

FIGS. 21, 24 and 27 is a graph of the internal concrete temperature ofconcrete made with Formulation No. 3 in both a conventional horizontalconcrete form and a horizontal insulated concrete form in accordancewith the present invention. The ambient temperature is also shown onthis graph.

As can be seen from FIGS. 21, 24 and 27, the concrete made withFormulation No. 3 within the conventional form reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 35° C. relatively quickly and returned toapproximately ambient temperature within approximately one day. Theconcrete in the conventional concrete form then fluctuated approximately3 to 20° C. on a daily basis.

The concrete made with Formulation No. 3 within the insulated concreteform reached an internal temperature of 35° C. in about the same amountof time as the concrete in the conventional form. However, while thetemperature of the concrete in the conventional form began to drop fromits maximum temperature, the temperature of the concrete in theinsulated concrete form continued to increase for a relatively longperiod of time (approximately 1.5 days) until it reached a maximumtemperature of approximately 55° C. The internal temperature of theconcrete in the insulated concrete form then slowly declined until itreached ambient temperature after approximately 10 days. For theremainder of the 90-day test period, the internal temperature of theconcrete in the insulated concrete form fluctuated little.

Example 10

The concrete maturity for the six horizontal slabs identified above inExample 9 was measured by the Intellirock II™ maturity/temperatureloggers. A summary of this test data is shown in Table 8 below.

TABLE 8 ASTM C-42 Horizontal Forms Field Coring Conventional vs.Greencraft Forms Testing: Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) Formulation No. 1Formulation No. 2 Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated ConventionalInsulated Conventional Insulated Actual Age Form Greencraft FormGreencraft Form Greencraft Age Age Maturity Maturity Maturity MaturityMaturity Maturity (days) (hours) ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs 0.33 8 308 362 229 249 256 276 0.75 18 652 1001 516 674558 720 1 24 886 1386 685 948 772 1012 2 48 1711 2774 1481 2044 15502293 3 72 2424 3959 2213 3036 2232 3484 7 168 5237 7650 5232 6406 50667226 14 336 10822 12625 10629 11395 10701 12297 28 672 22912 22919 2244921752 22999 22969 56 1344 44396 43137 44655 41532 46295 42944 90 216067038 65879 68541 63373 71066 65303

The test data in Table 8 above shows greater concrete maturity for theconcrete cured in the insulated concrete forms compared to the sameconcrete formulation cured in the conventional form. For example, at day1 Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form had a maturity of 886°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturityof 1386° C.-Hrs or 56% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. At day 2 Formulation No. 1 in the conventionalform had a maturity of 1711° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in theinsulated form had a maturity of 2774° C.-Hrs or 62% greater concretematurity for the concrete in the insulated concrete form. At day 3Formulation No. 1 in the conventional form had a maturity of 2424°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 1 in the insulated form had a maturityof 3959° C.-Hrs or 63% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7 Formulation No. 1 in theconventional form had a maturity of 5237° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 1 in the insulated form had a maturity of 7650° C.-Hrs or 46%greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulated concreteform.

At day 2 Formulation No. 2 in the conventional form had a maturity of1481° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had amaturity of 2044° C.-Hrs or 38% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form. For example, at day 3Formulation No. 2 in the conventional form had a maturity of 2213°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 2 in the insulated form had a maturityof 3036° C.-Hrs or 37% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7 Formulation No. 2 in theconventional form had a maturity of 5232° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 2 in the insulated form had a maturity of 6404° C.-Hrs or 22%greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulated concreteform.

At day 2 Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of1550° C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had amaturity of 2293° C.-Hrs or 13% greater concrete maturity for theconcrete in the insulated concrete form. For example, at day 3Formulation No. 3 in the conventional form had a maturity of 2232°C.-Hrs; whereas, Formulation No. 3 in the insulated form had a maturityof 3484° C.-Hrs or 56% greater concrete maturity for the concrete in theinsulated concrete form. Similarly, at day 7 Formulation No. 3 in theconventional form had a maturity of 5066° C.-Hrs; whereas, FormulationNo. 3 in the insulated form had a maturity of 7226° C.-Hrs or 42%greater concrete maturity for the concrete in the insulated concreteform.

Example 11

In accordance with ASTM 42, cored samples of the concrete from eachdifferent form described above in Example 10 were cored and tested by anindependent, accredited concrete testing laboratory for determiningcompressive strength according to ASTM C-39. The cored samples of theconcrete were tested at 3 days, 7 days, 28 days and 90 days. A summaryof this test data is shown below in Table 9 below.

TABLE 9 Formulation Horizontal Compressive Strength (psi) No. Form Type3 days 7 days 28 days 90 days 1 Insulated 4,080 4,700 4,530 5,640Conventional 3,130 3,510 4,840 5,490 2 Insulated 2,220 2,830 3,670 4,860Conventional 1,360 1,900 4,920 5,830 3 Insulated 3,020 3,780 4,390 4,860Conventional 1,150 2,570 4,200 4,390

The test data in Table 9 above surprisingly and unexpectedly shows thatthe formulations in the insulated concrete forms achieved betterstrength, and particularly much better early concrete strength, than thesame concrete in the conventional forms. Specifically, at day 3Formulation No. 1 had 30% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in the conventional concreteform. At day 3 Formulation No. 2 had 63% higher compressive strength inthe insulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 2 in theconventional concrete form. And, at day 3 Formulation No. 3 had 162%higher compressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 3 in the conventional concrete form.

At day 7 Formulation No. 1 had 34% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At day 7 Formulation 2 had 49% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 2 in the conventional concrete form. And, at day 7Formulation No. 3 had 47% higher compressive strength in the insulatedconcrete form compared to Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concreteform.

At day 28 the results for Formulation Nos. 1 and 2 appear to be ananomaly or incorrect. At day 28 Formulation No. 3 had 4.5% highercompressive strength in the insulated concrete form compared toFormulation No. 3 in the conventional concrete form.

At day 90 Formulation No. 1 had 2.7% higher compressive strength in theinsulated concrete form compared to Formulation No. 1 in theconventional concrete form. At day 90 the results for Formulation No. 2appear to be an anomaly or incorrect. And, at day 90 Formulation No. 3had 10% higher compressive strength in the insulated concrete formcompared to Formulation No. 3 in the conventional concrete form.

Although the foregoing examples illustrate that method of curing theconcrete formulation disclosed above in an insulated concrete form, itis specifically contemplated that the foregoing concrete formulation canbe cured in a precast concrete form or mold where additional heat isapplied to the concrete, such as steam curing, or as disclosed inapplicant's co-pending patent application entitled “Method forElectronic Temperature Controlled Curing of Concrete and AcceleratingConcrete Maturity or Equivalent Age, Precast Concrete Structures andObjects and Apparatus for Same,” Ser. No. 13/626,075, filed Sep. 25,2012 (the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in itsentirety).

Example 12

It is worth noting that the testing/experiments of each concreteformulation from Examples 6, 7 and 8 were performed concurrently withthe testing/experiments of Examples 9, 10 and 11. Therefore eachdifferent concrete formulation was cured in the same summer time ambienttemperature for both the vertical forms and the horizontal forms. Whencomparing the temperature charts and maturity data for each concreteformulation from the vertical forms to the respective concreteformulation temperature and maturity data for each of the horizontalforms, an unexpected, non-obvious occurrence is taking place. Theinternal temperature and maturity of concrete for each correspondingconcrete formulation is significantly greater for the vertical formsthan for the horizontal forms. This is true not only for thenon-insulated forms but also for the insulated forms. This is completelyunexpected since the same amount of four inches of insulation on allsides was used to encapsulate the concrete in the vertical forms as forthe horizontal insulated forms. This is further unexpected since thetesting was performed during the elevated ambient temperatures of thesummer months. The following data was taken from Tables 7 and 9 above.

At day 3 Formulation No. 1 in a vertical insulated form had acompressive strength of 4560 psi, while Formulation No. 1 in ahorizontal insulated form had a compressive strength of 4080 psi, whichis a 10% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated formcompared to the vertical insulated form. At day 7 Formulation No. 1 in avertical insulated form had a compressive strength of 5460 psi, whileFormulation No. 1 in horizontal insulated form had a compressivestrength of 4700 psi, which is a 14% reduction in strength for thehorizontal insulated form compared to the vertical insulated form. Atday 28 Formulation No. 1 in a vertical insulated form had a compressivestrength of 6310 psi, while Formulation No. 1 in a horizontal insulatedform had a compressive strength of 4530 psi, which is a 28% reduction instrength for the horizontal insulated form compared to the verticalinsulated form. At day 90 Formulation No. 1 in a vertical insulated formhad a compressive strength of 6490 psi, while Formulation No. 1 inhorizontal insulated form a compressive strength of 5490 psi, which is a15% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated form compared tothe vertical insulated form.

At 3 day Formulation No. 1 in a vertical conventional form had acompressive strength of 3470 psi, while Formulation No. 1 in ahorizontal conventional form had a compressive strength of 3130 psi,which is a 10% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated formcompared to the vertical insulated form. At day 7 Formulation No. 1 in avertical conventional form had a compressive strength of 3970 psi, whileFormulation No. 1 in horizontal conventional form had a compressivestrength of 3510 psi, which is an 11% reduction in strength for thehorizontal insulated form compared to the vertical insulated form. Atday 28 Formulation No. 1 in a vertical conventional form had acompressive strength of 5430 psi, while Formulation No. 1 in ahorizontal conventional form had a compressive strength of 4840 psi,which is an 11% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated formcompared to the vertical insulated form. At day 90 Formulation No. 1 ina vertical conventional form had a compressive strength of 6530 psi,while Formulation No. 1 in a horizontal conventional form had acompressive strength of 5490 psi, which is an 16% reduction in strengthfor the horizontal insulated form compared to the vertical insulatedform.

At day 3 Formulation No. 2 in a vertical insulated form had acompressive strength of 2660 psi, while Formulation No. 2 in ahorizontal insulated form had a compressive strength of 2220 psi, whichis an 16% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated formcompared to the vertical insulated form. At day 7 Formulation No. 2 in avertical insulated form had a compressive strength of 3700 psi, whileFormulation No. 2 in a horizontal insulated form had a compressivestrength of 2830 psi, which is an 16% reduction in strength for thehorizontal insulated form compared to the vertical insulated form. Atday 28 Formulation No. 2 in a vertical insulated form had a compressivestrength of 5080 psi, while Formulation No. 2 in a horizontal insulatedform had a compressive strength of 3670 psi, which is an 28% reductionin strength for the horizontal insulated form compared to the verticalinsulated form. At day 90 Formulation No. 2 in a vertical insulated formhad a compressive strength of 5510 psi, while Formulation No. 2 inhorizontal insulated form had a compressive strength of 4860 psi, whichis an 16% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated formcompared to the vertical insulated form.

At day 3 Formulation No. 3 in a vertical insulated form had acompressive strength of 4530 psi, while Formulation No. 3 in horizontalinsulated form had a compressive strength of 3020 psi, which is a 33%reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated form compared to thevertical insulated form. At day 7 Formulation No. 3 in verticalinsulated form had a compressive strength of 5380 psi, while FormulationNo. 3 in a horizontal insulated form had a compressive strength of 3780psi, which is an 30% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulatedform compared to the vertical insulated form. At day 28 Formulation No.3 in a vertical insulated form had a compressive strength of 6100 psi,while Formulation No. 3 in a horizontal insulated form had a compressivestrength of 4390 psi, which is an 28% reduction in strength for thehorizontal insulated form compared to the vertical insulated form. Atday 90 Formulation No. 3 in vertical insulated form had a compressivestrength of 6490 psi, while Formulation No. 3 in a horizontal insulatedform had a compressive strength of 4860 psi, which is an 25% reductionin strength for the horizontal insulated form compared to the verticalinsulated form.

At 3 day Formulation No. 3 in a vertical conventional form had acompressive strength of 1290 psi, while Formulation No. 3 in ahorizontal conventional form had a compressive strength of 1150 psi,which is an 10% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated formcompared to the vertical insulated form. At day 7 Formulation No. 3 in avertical conventional form had a compressive strength of 2440 psi, whileFormulation No. 3 in a horizontal conventional form was 2570 psi, whichis an 5% increase in strength for the horizontal insulated form comparedto the vertical insulated form. At day 28 Formulation No. 3 in avertical conventional form had a compressive strength of 5520 psi, whileFormulation No. 3 in a horizontal conventional form had a compressivestrength of 4200 psi, which is an 24% reduction in strength for thehorizontal insulated form compared to the vertical insulated form. Atday 90 Formulation No. 1 in a vertical conventional form had acompressive strength of 5440 psi, while Formulation No. 3 in ahorizontal conventional form had a compressive strength of 4390 psi,which is an 19% reduction in strength for the horizontal insulated formcompared to the vertical insulated form.

This internal temperature and concrete maturity difference points to thefact that the ground acts as a heat sink, removing heat from objectsthat are in contact with it. Therefore, in the case of the slabs ongrade, or any object cast on the ground or on a concrete slab that is onthe ground, such as precast tilt-up concrete panels cast on a buildingslab, the heat of hydration is lost even faster from the concretecompared to the loss of the heat of hydration from concrete placed inelevated or vertical forms surrounded by air at ambient temperatures.The ground has an infinite thermal mass and, especially during thesummer, will usually be colder than the air and especially colder thanthe internal temperature of concrete cast on it. This lower temperatureof the ground, coupled with the infinite thermal mass of the Earth,absorbs the heat of hydration from any concrete cast on the ground at amuch faster rate even though the four inches of expanded polystyrenefoam insulation were used for the Greencraft forms used in these tests.The heat loss of the concrete for any objects cast on the ground to theground is regardless of the ambient temperature, but is even moredramatic during the spring or fall seasons and especially during thecold winter months than during the hot summer days. Therefore the use ofthese concrete formulations, for any slab cast on the ground or for anypanel, such as precast tilt-up panels, cast on a slab on grade, arecompletely impossible since the concrete may never achieve the necessarystrength for loads to be placed upon it. Therefore the method of curingconcrete for slabs on grade, or panels cast on concrete slabs, such asprecast tilt-up concrete panels, and the like, by using insulation atthe bottom of the concrete and temporarily insulating the top of theconcrete is the only effective way to make use of these types ofconcrete formulation.

Example 13

A comparison of the concrete maturity, or equivalent age, data from theactual cored test for the vertical forms shown in Tables 2, 6 and 8above and the C-39 laboratory cylinder test data shown in Table 5 at Day3 is summarized in Tables 10-12 below.

TABLE 10 Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) at Day 3: Vertical Forms vs.Laboratory Test Cylinders Formulation No. 1 Formulation No. 2Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated Conventional InsulatedConventional Insulated Form Greencraft Form Greencraft Form GreencraftMaturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Day 3 ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs Table 2 1340 3683 1600 30711299 2535 Table 5 1523 1615 1474 % Difference −12% 141% −1% 90% −12% 71%

This data clearly shows that the three concrete formulations in thevertical insulated concrete forms all had improved maturity ranging from71% to 141% compared to the three concrete formulations in the cylinderscured according to ASTM C-39. Conversely, all three formulations curedin the vertical non-insulated forms (i.e., Greencraft forms) had poorermaturity ranging from −1% to −12% compared to the same threeformulations cured in the laboratory cylinders in accordance with ASTMC-39.

TABLE 11 Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) at Day 3: Vertical Forms vs.Laboratory Test Cylinders Formulation No. 1 Formulation No. 2Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated Conventional InsulatedConventional Insulated Form Greencraft Form Greencraft Form GreencraftMaturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Day 3 ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs Table 6 2540 4434 2238 33252216 3640 Table 5 1523 1615 1474 % Difference 68% 191% 38% 105% 50% 147%

This data clearly shows that the three concrete formulations in thevertical insulated concrete forms all had improved maturity ranging from105% to 191% compared to the three concrete formulations in thecylinders cured according to ASTM C-39. Conversely, all threeformulations cured in the vertical non-insulated forms (i.e., Greencraftforms) had improved maturity ranging from only 38% to 68% compared tothe same three formulations cured in the laboratory cylinders inaccordance with ASTM C-39.

TABLE 12 Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) at Day 3: Horizontal Forms vs.Laboratory Test Cylinders Formulation No. 1 Formulation No. 2Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated Conventional InsulatedConventional Insulated Form Greencraft Form Greencraft Form GreencraftMaturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Day 3 ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs Table 8 2424 3959 2213 30362232 3484 Table 5 1523 1615 1474 % Difference 59% 160% 37% 88% 51% 136%

This data clearly shows that the three concrete formulations in thehorizontal insulated concrete forms all had improved maturity rangingfrom 88% to 160% compared to the three concrete formulations in thecylinders cured according to ASTM C-39. Conversely, all threeformulations cured in the horizontal non-insulated forms (i.e.,Greencraft forms) had improved maturity ranging from only 37% to 59%compared to the same three formulations cured in the laboratorycylinders in accordance with ASTM C-39.

A comparison of the concrete maturity, or equivalent age, data from theactual cored test for the vertical forms shown in Tables 2, 6 and 8above and the C-39 laboratory cylinder test data shown in Table 5 at Day7 is summarized in Tables 13-15 below.

TABLE 13 Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) at Day 7: Vertical Forms vs.Laboratory Test Cylinders Formulation No. 1 Formulation No. 2Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated Conventional InsulatedConventional Insulated Form Greencraft Form Greencraft Form GreencraftMaturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Day 7 ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs Table 2 3524 7589 3511 67053391 5441 Table 5 3263 3570 3220 % Difference 8% 132% −1% 87% 5% 69%

This data clearly shows that the three concrete formulations in thevertical insulated concrete forms all had improved maturity ranging from69% to 132% compared to the three concrete formulations in the cylinderscured according to ASTM C-39. Conversely, all three formulations curedin the vertical non-insulated forms (i.e., Greencraft forms) hadpoorer/improved maturity ranging from only −1% to 8% compared to thesame three formulations cured in the laboratory cylinders in accordancewith ASTM C-39.

TABLE 14 Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) at Day 7: Vertical Forms vs.Laboratory Test Cylinders Formulation No. 1 Formulation No. 2Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated Conventional InsulatedConventional Insulated Form Greencraft Form Greencraft Form GreencraftMaturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Day 7 ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs Table 6 4909 9133 4702 73344639 7779 Table 5 3263 3570 3220 % Difference 50% 180% 32% 105% 44% 141%

This data clearly shows that the three concrete formulations in thevertical insulated concrete forms all had improved maturity ranging from105% to 180% compared to the three concrete formulations in thecylinders cured according to ASTM C-39. Conversely, all threeformulations cured in the vertical non-insulated forms (i.e., Greencraftforms) had improved maturity ranging from only 32% to 50% compared tothe same three formulations cured in the laboratory cylinders inaccordance with ASTM C-39.

TABLE 15 Concrete Maturity (° C.-Hrs) at Day 7: Horizontal Forms vs.Laboratory Test Cylinders Formulation No. 1 Formulation No. 2Formulation No. 3 Conventional Insulated Conventional InsulatedConventional Insulated Form Greencraft Form Greencraft Form GreencraftMaturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Maturity Day 7 ° C.-Hrs °C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs ° C.-Hrs Table 8 5237 7650 5232 64065066 7226 Table 5 3263 3570 3220 % Difference 60% 134% 46% 79% 57% 124%

This data clearly shows that the three concrete formulations in thehorizontal insulated concrete forms all had improved maturity rangingfrom 79% to 134% compared to the three concrete formulations in thecylinders cured according to ASTM C-39. Conversely, all threeformulations cured in the horizontal non-insulated forms (i.e.,Greencraft forms) had improved maturity ranging from only 46% to 60%compared to the same three formulations cured in the laboratorycylinders in accordance with ASTM C-39.

Although the slab on grade insulated concrete form disclosed above, canuse the concrete formulations disclosed above, it is specificallycontemplated that other horizontal insulated concrete forms, such asused for slab on grade, precast panels or objects or tilt-up panels, canuse conventional concrete; i.e., concrete where portland cementcomprises all, or at least 80% by weight of the cement, can be used withthe concrete curing method of the present invention. That is, anyconcrete formulation, including conventional portland cement concrete,can be cured in a horizontal insulated concrete form or in a concretemold that is insulated on all sides to the same extent as describedherein, and as disclosed in applicant's co-pending patent applicationentitled “Concrete Runways, Roads, Highways and Slabs on Grade andMethods of Making Same,” Ser. No. 13/626,540, filed Sep. 25, 2012 andapplicant's co-pending patent application entitled “Precast ConcreteStructures, Precast Tilt-Up Concrete Structures and Methods of MakingSame,” Ser. No. 13/247,256 filed Sep. 28, 2011 (the disclosures of whichare both incorporated herein by reference in their entirety).

All foregoing references to prior printed publications, published patentapplications and issued patents are incorporated herein by reference intheir entirety.

It should be understood, of course, that the foregoing relates only tocertain disclosed embodiments of the present invention and that numerousmodifications or alterations may be made therein without departing fromthe spirit and scope of the invention as set forth in the appendedclaims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of making cementitious-based materialhaving a compressive strength greater than about 1,000 psi, the methodcomprising: placing a plastic cementitious-based material in aninsulated concrete form or mold wherein the insulated concrete form ormold has an R-value of at least 1.5 whereby at least a portion of theinitial heat of hydration of the cementitious-based material is retainedin the insulated concrete form or mold; wherein the cementitious-basedmaterial comprises: aggregate; cementitious material, wherein thecementitious material consists essentially of approximately 30% toapproximately 80% by weight portland cement, approximately 0% toapproximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 20% to approximately 50% byweight fly ash; and water sufficient to hydrate the cementitious-basedmaterial.
 2. The method of claim 1 further comprising allowing thecementitious-based material to at least partially cure in the insulatedconcrete form.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the cementitious-basedmaterial comprises approximately one-third by weight portland cement,approximately one-third by weight slag cement and approximatelyone-third by weight fly ash.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein theinsulated concrete form has an R-value of at least
 4. 5. The method ofclaim 4, wherein the weight ratio of portland cement to slag cement tofly ash is approximately 1 to 1 to
 1. 6. The method of claim 4, whereinthe weight ratio of portland cement to slag cement to fly ash isapproximately 0.85-1.15:0.85-1.15:0.85-1.15.
 7. The method of claim 4,wherein the weight ratio of portland cement to slag cement to fly ash isapproximately 0.9-1.1:0.9-1.1:0.9-1.1.
 8. The method of claim 4, whereinthe weight ratio of portland cement to slag cement to fly ash isapproximately 0.95-1.05:0.95-1.05:0.95-1.05.
 9. The method of claim 1,wherein the insulated concrete form has an R-value of at least
 8. 10.The method of claim 1, wherein the weight ratio of portland cement toslag cement to fly ash is approximately 1 to 1 to
 1. 11. The method ofclaim 1, wherein the weight ratio of portland cement to slag cement tofly ash is approximately 0.85-1.15:0.85-1.15:0.85-1.15.
 12. The methodof claim 1, wherein the weight ratio of portland cement to slag cementto fly ash is approximately 0.9-1.1:0.9-1.1:0.9-1.1.
 13. The method ofclaim 1, wherein the weight ratio of portland cement to slag cement tofly ash is approximately 0.95-1.05:0.95-1.05:0.95-1.05.
 14. The methodof claim 1, wherein the insulated concrete form or mold comprises a pairof rectangular vertically oriented insulating layers horizontally spacedfrom each other.
 15. The method of claim 1, wherein the insulatedconcrete form or mold comprises a pair of rectangular horizontallyoriented insulating layers vertically spaced from each other.
 16. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the insulated concrete form or mold comprisesa first portion comprising an insulating layer and a second portioncomprising an insulated blanket.
 17. The method of claim 1, wherein theinsulated concrete form or mold comprises a first portion comprising aninsulating foam panel and a second portion comprising an electricallyheated blanket.
 18. The method of claim 1, wherein the insulatedconcrete form or mold comprises a conventional concrete form havinginsulating material on a side opposite a concrete contacting portion.19. The method of claim 1, wherein the cementitious-based materialconsists essentially of: approximately 30% to approximately 70% byweight portland cement, approximately 0% to approximately 50% by weightslag cement, and 20% to approximately 50% by weight fly ash.
 20. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the cementitious-based material consistsessentially of: approximately 30% to approximately 60% by weightportland cement, approximately 0% to approximately 50% by weight slagcement, and 20% to approximately 50% by weight fly ash.
 21. The methodof claim 1, wherein the cementitious-based material consists essentiallyof: approximately 30% to approximately 50% by weight portland cement,approximately 0% to approximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 20% toapproximately 50% by weight fly ash.
 22. A method of making acementitious-based object or structure having a compressive strengthgreater than about 1,000 psi, the method comprising: placing a plasticcementitious-based material in an insulated concrete form, wherein theinsulated concrete form has an R-value of at least 1.5 whereby at leasta portion of the initial heat of hydration of the cementitious-basedmaterial is retained in the insulated concrete form or mold; wherein thecement-based material comprises: aggregate; cementitious material,wherein the cementitious material consists essentially of approximately30% to approximately 80% by weight portland cement, and theapproximately 5% by weight to approximately 50% by weight slag cementand 0% to approximately 50% by weight fly ash; and water sufficient tohydrate the cementitious material.
 23. The method of claim 22, whereinthe cementitious-based material consists essentially of: approximately30% to approximately 70% by weight portland cement, approximately 5% toapproximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 50% byweight fly ash.
 24. The method of claim 22, wherein thecementitious-based material consists essentially of: approximately 30%to approximately 60% by weight portland cement, approximately 5% toapproximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 50% byweight fly ash.
 25. The method of claim 22, wherein thecementitious-based material consists essentially of: approximately 30%to approximately 50% by weight portland cement, approximately 5% toapproximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 0% to approximately 50% byweight fly ash.
 26. The method of claim 22, wherein the insulatedconcrete form has an R-value of at least
 4. 27. The method of claim 26,wherein the cementitious-based material consists essentially of:approximately 30% to approximately 70% by weight portland cement,approximately 0% to approximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 20% toapproximately 50% by weight fly ash.
 28. The method of claim 26, whereinthe cementitious-based material consists essentially of: approximately30% to approximately 60% by weight portland cement, approximately 0% toapproximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 20% to approximately 50% byweight fly ash.
 29. The method of claim 26, wherein thecementitious-based material consists essentially of: approximately 30%to approximately 50% by weight portland cement, approximately 0% toapproximately 50% by weight slag cement, and 20% to approximately 50% byweight fly ash.
 30. The method of claim 22, wherein the insulatedconcrete form has an R-value of at least 8.